MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2418999752 · doi:10.1142/s0218126616501231

Multi-Exposure and Multi-Focus Image Fusion in Gradient Domain

2016· article· en· W2418999752 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Circuits Systems and Computers · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Image Fusion Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChrominanceLuminanceArtificial intelligenceFocus (optics)Image fusionComputer visionComputer scienceFusionImage gradientThresholdingGrayscalePixelImage (mathematics)MathematicsColor imageImage processingOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multi-exposure and multi-focus image fusion algorithm is proposed. The algorithm is developed for color images and is based on blending the gradients of the luminance components of the input images using the maximum gradient magnitude at each pixel location and then obtaining the fused luminance using a Haar wavelet-based image reconstruction technique. This image reconstruction algorithm is of [Formula: see text] complexity and includes a Poisson solver at each resolution to eliminate artifacts that may appear due to the nonconservative nature of the resulting gradient. The fused chrominance, on the other hand, is obtained as a weighted mean of the chrominance channels. The particular case of grayscale images is treated as luminance fusion. Experimental results and comparison with other fusion techniques indicate that the proposed algorithm is fast and produces similar or better results than existing techniques for both multi-exposure as well as multi-focus images.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · 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