MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525169039 · doi:10.1109/dmiaf.2016.7574892

Perception-based Histogram Equalization for tone mapping applications

2016· article· en· W2525169039 on OpenAlexaff
Stelios Ploumis, Ronan Boitard, Mahsa T. Pourazad, Panos Nasiopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTone mappingHigh dynamic rangeComputer scienceHistogram equalizationLuminanceHigh-dynamic-range imagingComputer visionHistogramDynamic rangeBrightnessArtificial intelligenceBackward compatibilityNoise (video)Gamma correctionImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the ever increasing commercial availability of High Dynamic Range (HDR) content and displays, backward compatibility of HDR content with Standard Dynamic Range displays is currently a topic of high importance. Over the years, a significant amount of Tone Mapping Operators (TMOs) have been proposed to adapt HDR content to the restricted capabilities of SDR displays. Among them, the Histogram Equalization (HE) is considered to provide good results for a wide set of images. However, the naïve application of HE results either in banding artifacts or noise amplification when the HDR image has large unified areas (i.e. sky). In order to differentiate relevant information from noise in a uniform background, or in dark areas, the authors proposed a ceiling function. Their method results in noise-free but dim images. In this paper we propose a novel ceiling function which is based on the Perceptual Quantizer (PQ) function. Our method uses as threshold the number of code-words that PQ assigns on a luminance range in the original HDR image and the corresponding number of code-words in the resulting SDR image. We limit the number of code-words on SDR to be equal or less than the HDR. The saved code-words during the ceiling operation are redistributed to increase the contrast as well as the brightness of the final image. Results shows that provided SDR images are noise-free and brighter than the one obtained with prior HE operators. Finally since the proposed method is a Global TMO, it is thereby of low complexity and suitable for real time applications.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.651
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207