HistoGAN: Controlling Colors of GAN-Generated and Real Images via Color Histograms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While generative adversarial networks (GANs) can successfully produce high-quality images, they can be challenging to control. Simplifying GAN-based image generation is critical for their adoption in graphic design and artistic work. This goal has led to significant interest in methods that can intuitively control the appearance of images generated by GANs. In this paper, we present HistoGAN, a color histogram-based method for controlling GAN-generated images’ colors. We focus on color histograms as they provide an intuitive way to describe image color while remaining decoupled from domain-specific semantics. Specifically, we introduce an effective modification of the recent StyleGAN architecture [31] to control the colors of GAN-generated images specified by a target color histogram feature. We then describe how to expand HistoGAN to recolor real images. For image recoloring, we jointly train an encoder network along with HistoGAN. The recoloring model, ReHistoGAN, is an unsupervised approach trained to encourage the network to keep the original image’s content while changing the colors based on the given target histogram. We show that this histogram-based approach offers a better way to control GAN-generated and real images’ colors while producing more compelling results compared to existing alternative strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".