Learning Tone Curves for Local Image Enhancement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Image enhancement methods can be formulated as global transformations, local transformations, pixel-wise processing, or a mixture of these operations. Global transformations are limited in enhancing local image regions. Existing local and pixel-wise methods mitigate this issue, but give rise to the additional challenge of limited interpretability. Bridging the gap between global and local methods, we propose a local tone mapping network (LTMNet) that learns a grid of tone curves to locally enhance an image. Tone curves are commonly used by photo-editing software and offer an intuitive representation to photographers, facilitating subsequent customization of the image. Tone curves are also widely used in image signal processors (ISPs), making our method easy to deploy on cameras. Because existing datasets contain image enhancement and photofinishing beyond global and local tone mapping, we also propose a new dataset representative of local tone mapping—the LTM dataset. We evaluate our method on this new dataset as well as MIT-Adobe and HDR+ datasets. We show that the proposed LTMNet outperforms existing methods in local tone mapping while achieving competitive performance modeling additional photofinishing. Furthermore, we show that our method can be assistive in user-interactive photo-editing tools. Our code, model, and data will be released publicly.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".