MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2461208471 · doi:10.1109/tip.2016.2588320

Estimation of Gaussian, Poissonian-Gaussian, and Processed Visual Noise and its Level Function

2016· article· en· W2461208471 on OpenAlexafffund
Meisam Rakhshanfar, Maria A. Amer

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsGaussian noiseValue noiseNoise (video)Gradient noiseMathematicsPiecewiseWhite noiseAdditive white Gaussian noiseArtificial intelligenceNoise measurementPattern recognition (psychology)GaussianStatisticsComputer scienceImage noiseAlgorithmNoise reductionNoise floorImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a method for estimating the image and video noises of different types: white Gaussian (signal-independent), mixed Poissonian-Gaussian (signal-dependent), or processed (non-white). Our method also estimates the noise level function (NLF) of these types. We do so by classifying image patches based on their intensity and variance in order to find homogeneous regions that best represent the noise. We assume that the noise variance is a piecewise linear function of intensity in each intensity class. To find noise representative regions, noisy (signal-free) patches are first nominated in each intensity class. Next, clusters of connected patches are weighted, where the weights are calculated based on the degree of similarity to the noise model. The highest ranked cluster defines the peak noise variance, and other selected clusters are used to approximate the NLF. The more information we incorporate, such as temporal data and camera settings, the more reliable the estimation becomes. To account for the processed noise, (i.e., remaining after in-camera processing), we consider the ratio of low-to-high-frequency energies. We address noise variations along video signals using a temporal stabilization of the estimated noise. Objective and subjective simulations demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms other noise estimation techniques, both in accuracy and speed.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations55
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207