MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283815594 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v36i3.20276

Efficient Model-Driven Network for Shadow Removal

2022· article· en· W4283815594 on OpenAlexaff
Yurui Zhu, Zeyu Xiao, Yanchi Fang, Xueyang Fu, Zhiwei Xiong, Zheng-Jun Zha

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Science and Technology of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsShadow (psychology)InterpretabilityComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceConvolutional neural networkTask (project management)Computer visionDeep learningPoint (geometry)Shadow mappingFLOPSImage (mathematics)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
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

Citations58
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207