MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011768656 · doi:10.1109/tip.2020.2977573

DDcGAN: A Dual-Discriminator Conditional Generative Adversarial Network for Multi-Resolution Image Fusion

2020· article· en· W3011768656 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiayi Ma, Han Xu, Junjun Jiang, Xiaoguang Mei, Xiao–Ping Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Image Fusion Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDiscriminatorArtificial intelligenceDual (grammatical number)Image fusionComputer scienceGenerative adversarial networkAdversarial systemImage (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionFusionImage processingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we proposed a new end-to-end model, termed as dual-discriminator conditional generative adversarial network (DDcGAN), for fusing infrared and visible images of different resolutions. Our method establishes an adversarial game between a generator and two discriminators. The generator aims to generate a real-like fused image based on a specifically designed content loss to fool the two discriminators, while the two discriminators aim to distinguish the structure differences between the fused image and two source images, respectively, in addition to the content loss. Consequently, the fused image is forced to simultaneously keep the thermal radiation in the infrared image and the texture details in the visible image. Moreover, to fuse source images of different resolutions, e.g., a low-resolution infrared image and a high-resolution visible image, our DDcGAN constrains the downsampled fused image to have similar property with the infrared image. This can avoid causing thermal radiation information blurring or visible texture detail loss, which typically happens in traditional methods. In addition, we also apply our DDcGAN to fusing multi-modality medical images of different resolutions, e.g., a low-resolution positron emission tomography image and a high-resolution magnetic resonance image. The qualitative and quantitative experiments on publicly available datasets demonstrate the superiority of our DDcGAN over the state-of-the-art, in terms of both visual effect and quantitative metrics.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1,271
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicAdvanced Image Fusion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207