MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2203198397 · doi:10.1109/have.2015.7359452

Stereoscopic chroma key matting using statistical analysis in CIECAM02 color space

2015· article· en· W2203198397 on OpenAlexaff
Ling Yin, Wenyi Wang, Jiying Zhao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionColor spaceComputer scienceHueHSL and HSVRGB color modelColor histogramColor imagePixelPattern recognition (psychology)Image processingImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a chroma keying system, the foreground objects are recorded in front of background with solid color, which is used as side information to efficiently and accurately separate the foreground from the background. Although the technique of chroma keying has been widely used for decades, there is little work on its application to stereoscopic images/videos in either industry or academia fields. We propose a new chroma key matting method to generate high quality matting results. Specifically, the colors of foreground objects to be chroma keyed are histogram analysed in CIECAM02 color space, which can provide better hue/saturation consistency compared to previous human visual system (HVS) based color spaces such as HSV, CIELab and IPT. The color of background region, which is occluded by foreground objects, is estimated by spatial affinity. With the estimated foreground/background color for each pixel, the foreground objects can be accurately extracted along with its transparency map α. By doing this, we can generate depth map with accurate and sharp boundary, which is essential for post 3D processing such as depth image based rendering (DIBR).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207