MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283687192 · doi:10.1109/tip.2022.3184819

Data Acquisition and Preparation for Dual-Reference Deep Learning of Image Super-Resolution

2022· article· en· W4283687192 on OpenAlexafffund
Yanhui Guo, Xiaolin Wu, Xiao Shu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUpsamplingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionBicubic interpolationImage resolutionProcess (computing)PixelImage qualityImage (mathematics)Pattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of deep learning based image super-resolution (SR) methods depend on how accurately the paired low and high resolution images for training characterize the sampling process of real cameras. Low and high resolution (LR ∼ HR) image pairs synthesized by degradation models (e.g., bicubic downsampling) deviate from those in reality; thus the synthetically-trained DCNN SR models work disappointingly when being applied to real-world images. To address this issue, we propose a novel data acquisition process to shoot a large set of LR ∼ HR image pairs using real cameras. The images are displayed on an ultra-high quality screen and captured at different resolutions. The resulting LR ∼ HR image pairs can be aligned at very high sub-pixel precision by a novel spatial-frequency dual-domain registration method, and hence they provide more appropriate training data for the learning task of super-resolution. Moreover, the captured HR image and the original digital image offer dual references to strengthen supervised learning. Experimental results show that training a super-resolution DCNN by our LR ∼ HR dataset achieves higher image quality than training it by other datasets in the literature. Moreover, the proposed screen-capturing data collection process can be automated; it can be carried out for any target camera with ease and low cost, offering a practical way of tailoring the training of a DCNN SR model separately to each of the given cameras.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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