MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2238590479 · doi:10.1142/s0219691315500381

A color image enhancement algorithm based on quaternion representation of vector rotation

2015· article· en· W2238590479 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fangnian Lang, Jiliu Zhou, Yuan Yan Tang, Zhaowei Shang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Wavelets Multiresolution and Information Processing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilMcMaster University
KeywordsQuaternionAlgorithmChrominanceComputer scienceColor imageArtificial intelligenceLuminanceRotation (mathematics)Unsharp maskingComputer visionMathematicsImage (mathematics)Image processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detail enhancement of color images is required in many applications. Unsharp masking (UM) is the most classical tool for detail enhancement. Many generalizing UM approaches have been proposed, for example, the rational UM technique, the cubic unsharp technique, the adaptive UM technique and so on. For color images, these algorithms have three steps: (a) Implement the color2gray step; (b) design an extracting method of high frequency information (HFI) based on the luminance component (LC); (c) complete the enhancing process utilizing the HFI. However, using only the HFI of the LC may lose the HFI of the chrominance component (CC). This paper proposes a quaternion based detail enhancement algorithm to extract details of the color image using both of the luminance and CCs. The proposed algorithm is designed to address three tasks: (1) designing an extraction method of the color high frequency information (CHFI) based on quaternion description of the 3D vector rotation; (2) performing an effective fusion strategy of the CHFI and the gray high frequency information (GHFI); (3) designing a quaternion based measure method of the local dynamic range, based on which the enhancement coefficients of the proposed algorithm can be determined. The performance of the proposed algorithm compares favorably with many other similar enhancement algorithms. The eight parameters can be adjusted to control the sharpness to produce the desired results, which makes the proposed algorithm practically useful.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Wavelets Multiresolution and Information ProcessingSame topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207