MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166135831 · doi:10.1068/p5321

A Biologically Inspired Algorithm for the Recovery of Shading and Reflectance Images

2004· article· en· W2166135831 on OpenAlexaff
Adriana Olmos, Frederick A. A. Kingdom

Bibliographic record

VenuePerception · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShadingReflectivityComputer visionComputer sciencePhotometric stereoArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmOpticsRemote sensingComputer graphics (images)GeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an algorithm for separating the shading and reflectance images of photographed natural scenes. The algorithm exploits the constraint that in natural scenes chromatic and luminance variations that are co-aligned mainly arise from changes in surface reflectance, whereas near-pure luminance variations mainly arise from shading and shadows. The novel aspect of the algorithm is the initial separation of the image into luminance and chromatic image planes that correspond to the luminance, red-green, and blue-yellow channels of the primate visual system. The red-green and blue-yellow image planes are analysed to provide a map of the changes in surface reflectance, which is then used to separate the reflectance from shading changes in both the luminance and chromatic image planes. The final reflectance image is obtained by reconstructing the chromatic and luminance-reflectance-change maps, while the shading image is obtained by subtracting the reconstructed luminance-reflectance image from the original luminance image. A number of image examples are included to illustrate the successes and limitations of the algorithm.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations357
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerceptionSame topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207