MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246735651 · doi:10.1109/icip.2018.8451391

Low-Frequency Image Noise Removal Using White Noise Filter

2018· article· en· W4246735651 on OpenAlexaff
Meisam Rakhshanfar, Maria A. Amer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaussian noiseImage noiseGradient noiseComputer scienceValue noiseSalt-and-pepper noiseNoise (video)Additive white Gaussian noiseWhite noiseArtificial intelligenceNoise measurementComputer visionDark-frame subtractionMedian filterNoise spectral densityColors of noiseNoise floorNoise reductionImage processingImage (mathematics)Noise figureTelecommunicationsBandwidth (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image noise filters usually assume noise as white Gaussian. However, in a capturing pipeline, noise often becomes spatially correlated due to in-camera processing that aims to suppress the noise and increase the compression rate. Mostly, only high-frequency noise components are suppressed since the image signal is more likely to appear in the low-frequency components of the captured image. As a result, noise emerges as coarse grain which makes white (all-pass) noise filters ineffective, especially when the resolution of the target display is lower than the captured image. Denoising of image approximation in coarse scale has the advantage of removing low-frequency noise, however, lack of spatial resolution degrades the image quality. This paper presents an approach for a coarse-grain removal. Our approach utilizes existing white Gaussian noise filters to address low-frequency component of spatially correlated noises, employing pixel decoupling, local shrinkage, and soft thresholding. Subjective and objective results show that the proposed approach better handles low-frequency noise compared to related work.

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 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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.261
Threshold uncertainty score0.867

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207