MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385551668 · doi:10.1111/cgf.14921

Harmonized Portrait‐Background Image Composition

2023· article· en· W4385551668 on OpenAlexaff
Yijiang Wang, Yuqi Li, Chong Wang, Xulun Ye

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image Synthesis
Canadian institutionsIONICS Mass Spectrometry (Canada)
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province
KeywordsPortraitComputer sciencePipeline (software)Artificial intelligenceComposition (language)Computer visionImage (mathematics)Style (visual arts)Computer graphics (images)ArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Portrait‐background image composition is a widely used operation in selfie editing, video meeting, and other portrait applications. To guarantee the realism of the composited images, the appearance of the foreground portraits needs to be adjusted to fit the new background images. Existing image harmonization approaches are proposed to handle general foreground objects, thus lack the special ability to adjust portrait foregrounds. In this paper, we present a novel end‐to‐end network architecture to learn both the content features and style features for portrait‐background composition. The method adjusts the appearance of portraits to make them compatible with backgrounds, while the generation of the composited images satisfies the prior of a style‐based generator. We also propose a pipeline to generate high‐quality and high‐variety synthesized image datasets for training and evaluation. The proposed method outperforms other state‐of‐the‐art methods both on the synthesized dataset and the real composited images and shows robust performance in video applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicGenerative Adversarial Networks and Image SynthesisFrench-language works237,207