MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379928090 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2023.3283979

Blind Image Deconvolution Using Variational Deep Image Prior

2023· article· en· W4379928090 on OpenAlexafffund
Dong Huo, Abbas Masoumzadeh, Rafsanjany Kushol, Yee‐Hong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsPrior probabilityArtificial intelligenceDeconvolutionComputer scienceMaximum a posteriori estimationImage (mathematics)Blind deconvolutionImage restorationGeneralizationPattern recognition (psychology)Benchmark (surveying)Computer visionPixelMathematicsImage processingAlgorithmMaximum likelihoodStatisticsBayesian probability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional deconvolution methods utilize hand-crafted image priors to constrain the optimization. While deep-learning-based methods have simplified the optimization by end-to-end training, they fail to generalize well to blurs unseen in the training dataset. Thus, training image-specific models is important for higher generalization. Deep image prior (DIP) provides an approach to optimize the weights of a randomly initialized network with a single degraded image by maximum a posteriori (MAP), which shows that the architecture of a network can serve as the hand-crafted image prior. Unlike conventional hand-crafted image priors, which are obtained through statistical methods, finding a suitable network architecture is challenging due to the unclear relationship between images and their corresponding architectures. As a result, the network architecture cannot provide enough constraint for the latent sharp image. This paper proposes a new variational deep image prior (VDIP) for blind image deconvolution, which exploits additive hand-crafted image priors on latent sharp images and approximates a distribution for each pixel to avoid suboptimal solutions. Our mathematical analysis shows that the proposed method can better constrain the optimization. The experimental results further demonstrate that the generated images have better quality than that of the original DIP on benchmark datasets.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine IntelligenceSame topicAdvanced Image Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207