MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Video Super-Resolution with Compensation in Feature Extraction

2019· article· en· W3004871661 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
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMotion compensationPixelComputer visionCompensation (psychology)Optical flowResidualFeature extractionConvolutional neural networkFeature (linguistics)Frame (networking)Bilateral filterMotion estimationPattern recognition (psychology)Filter (signal processing)Image (mathematics)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) based video super-resolution (VSR) methods heavily depend on motion compensation. Pixels in input frames are warped according to flow-like information to eliminate inter-frame differences. These methods have to make a trade-off between the distraction caused by spatio-temporal inconsistency and the pixel-wise detail damage caused by compensation. In this paper, we propose a novel video super-resolution method with a dynamic filter network based compensation module and a residual network based SR module. Unlike traditional VSR techniques, our method does not warp input pixels, but performs motion compensation during feature extractions. The experimental results demonstrate that our method outperforms the state-of-the-art VSR algorithms by at least 1.08 dB in terms of PSNR, and recovers more details together with superior visual quality.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.826
Threshold uncertainty score0.256

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 communication0.0000.002
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207