MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799228606 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2018.00674

Improving Color Reproduction Accuracy on Cameras

2018· article· en· W2799228606 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionColor balanceArtificial intelligenceColor spaceComputer scienceInterpolation (computer graphics)Color correctionFalse colorColor histogramProcess (computing)DemosaicingICC profileColor imageComputer graphics (images)Color modelImage processingImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the key operations performed on a digital camera is to map the sensor-specific color space to a standard perceptual color space. This procedure involves the application of a white-balance correction followed by a color space transform. The current approach for this colorimetric mapping is based on an interpolation of pre-calibrated color space transforms computed for two fixed illuminations (i.e., two white-balance settings). Images captured under different illuminations are subject to less color accuracy due to the use of this interpolation process. In this paper, we discuss the limitations of the current colorimetric mapping approach and propose two methods that are able to improve color accuracy. We evaluate our approach on seven different cameras and show improvements of up to 30% (DSLR cameras) and 59% (mobile phone cameras) in terms of color reproduction error.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.668
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColor Science and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207