TSDN: Two-Stage Raw Denoising in the Dark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Denoising is one of the most significant procedures in the image processing pipeline. Nowadays, deep-learning-based algorithms have achieved superior denoising quality than traditional algorithms. However, the noise becomes severe in the dark environment, where even the SOTA algorithms fail to achieve satisfactory performance. Besides, the high computational complexity of deep-learning-based denoising algorithms makes them hardware unfriendly and difficult to process high-resolution images in real-time. To address these issues, a novel low-light RAW denoising algorithm Two-Stage-Denoising (TSDN), is proposed in this paper. In TSDN, denoising consists of two procedures: noise removal and image restoration. Firstly, in the noise-removal stage, most noise is removed from the image, and an intermediate image that is easier for the network to recover the clean image is obtained. Then, in the restoration stage, the clean image is restored from the intermediate image. The TSDN is designed to be light-weight for real-time and hardware friendly. However, the tiny network will be insufficient for satisfactory performance if directly trained from scratch. Therefore, we present an Expand-Shrink-Learning (ESL) method to train the TSDN. In the ESL method, firstly, the tiny network is expanded to a larger one with similar architecture but more channels and layers, which enhances the learning ability of the network because of more parameters. Secondly, the larger network is shrunk and restored to the original small network in fine-grained learning procedures, including Channel-Shrink-Learning (CSL) and Layer-Shrink-Learning (LSL). Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed TSDN achieves better performance (PSNR and SSIM) than other SOTA algorithms in the dark environment. Besides, the model size of TSDN is one-eighth of that of the U-Net for denoising (a classical denoising network).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".