Physics-Based Rendering for Improving Robustness to Rain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To improve the robustness to rain, we present a physically-based rain rendering pipeline for realistically inserting rain into clear weather images. Our rendering relies on a physical particle simulator, an estimation of the scene lighting and an accurate rain photometric modeling to augment images with arbitrary amount of realistic rain or fog. We validate our rendering with a user study, proving our rain is judged 40% more realistic that state-of-the-art. Using our generated weather augmented Kitti and Cityscapes dataset, we conduct a thorough evaluation of deep object detection and semantic segmentation algorithms and show that their performance decreases in degraded weather, on the order of 15% for object detection and 60% for semantic segmentation. Furthermore, we show refining existing networks with our augmented images improves the robustness of both object detection and semantic segmentation algorithms. We experiment on nuScenes and measure an improvement of 15% for object detection and 35% for semantic segmentation compared to original rainy performance. Augmented databases and code are available on the project page.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".