MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384616416 · doi:10.23952/jnva.7.2023.4.04

Drop-DIP: A single-image denoising method based on deep image prior

2023· article· en· W4384616416 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nonlinear and Variational Analysis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOverfittingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)Noise reductionRegularization (linguistics)Image (mathematics)Similarity (geometry)Noise (video)Machine learningArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the past few years, deep learning methods have emerged as powerful image denoising tools.Among them, unsupervised deep learning without external training data is more practical and challenging.Reducing noisy overfitting is challenging due to single-image unsupervised learning is prone to overfitting.In this paper, we propose a method named drop-DIP combing Deep Image Prior (DIP) with drop-out for the first time to solve the above problems.In our method, we construct new network training pairs by performing drop-out training on the Bernoulli sampling of the input and output, and then construct a regularization term by using the corrected bias of the output and the generated prior.Finally, update the parameters through the Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM) algorithm.Experiments demonstrate that drop-DIP can alleviate the overfitting difficulty in DIP, facilitate the early stopping of the network, and is applicable to different noise models.Furthermore, our method has good performance on Peak Signal to Noise Ratio (PSNR), Structural Similarity (SSIM), and Learned Perceptual Image Patch Similarity (LPIPS) metrics validated by two different 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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nonlinear and Variational AnalysisSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207