Efficient Model-Driven Network for Shadow Removal
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) based methods have achieved significant breakthroughs in the task of single image shadow removal. However, the performance of these methods remains limited for several reasons. First, the existing shadow illumination model ignores the spatially variant property of the shadow images, hindering their further performance. Second, most deep CNNs based methods directly estimate the shadow free results from the input shadow images like a black box, thus losing the desired interpretability. To address these issues, we first propose a new shadow illumination model for the shadow removal task. This new shadow illumination model ensures the identity mapping among unshaded regions, and adaptively performs fine grained spatial mapping between shadow regions and their references. Then, based on the shadow illumination model, we reformulate the shadow removal task as a variational optimization problem. To effectively solve the variational problem, we design an iterative algorithm and unfold it into a deep network, naturally increasing the interpretability of the deep model. Experiments show that our method could achieve SOTA performance with less than half parameters, one-fifth of floating-point of operations (FLOPs), and over seventeen times faster than SOTA method (DHAN).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it