Cascading convolutional temporal color constancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computational color constancy (CCC) consists of computing color estimates of the ambient scene illumination and using them to remove unwanted chromatic distortions. Much research has focused on illuminant estimation for CCC on single images, with few attempts of leveraging the temporal information intrinsic in sequences of correlated images (e.g., the frames in a video), a task known as temporal color constancy (TCC). The state-of-the-art for TCC is temporal color constancy network (TCCNet), a deep-learning architecture that uses a convolutional long short-term memory network for aggregating the encodings produced by convolutional neural network submodules for each image in a sequence. We extend this architecture with different models obtained by (i) substituting the TCCNet submodules with cascading convolutional color constancy (C4), the state-of-the-art method for CCC targeting images and (ii) adding a cascading strategy to perform an iterative improvement of the estimate of the illuminant. We tested our models on the recently released TCC benchmark and achieved results that surpass the state-of-the-art. Analyzing the impact of the number of frames involved in illuminant estimation on performance, we show that it is possible to reduce inference time by training the models on a few selected frames from the sequences while retaining comparable accuracy.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".