MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2760554898 · doi:10.3934/ipi.2017044

Multiplicative noise removal with a sparsity-aware optimization model

2017· article· en· W2760554898 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

VenueInverse Problems and Imaging · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiplicative noiseImage restorationComputer scienceSpeckle noiseNoise (video)ConvexityAlgorithmNoise reductionImage (mathematics)MathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceImage processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Restoration of images contaminated by multiplicative noise (also known as speckle noise) is a key issue in coherent image processing. Notice that images under consideration are often highly compressible in certain suitably chosen transform domains. By exploring this intrinsic feature embedded in images, this paper introduces a variational restoration model for multiplicative noise reduction that consists of a term reflecting the observed image and multiplicative noise, a quadratic term measuring the closeness of the underlying image in a transform domain to a sparse vector, and a sparse regularizer for removing multiplicative noise. Being different from popular existing models which focus on pursuing convexity, the proposed sparsity-aware model may be nonconvex depending on the conditions of the parameters of the model for achieving the optimal denoising performance. An algorithm for finding a critical point of the objective function of the model is developed based on coupled fixed-point equations expressed in terms of the proximity operator of functions that appear in the objective function. Convergence analysis of the algorithm is provided. Experimental results are shown to demonstrate that the proposed iterative algorithm is sensitive to some initializations for obtaining the best restoration results. We observe that the proposed method with SAR-BM3D filtering images as initial estimates can remarkably outperform several state-of-art methods in terms of the quality of the restored 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.647

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.230 · 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