MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386076237 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52729.2023.01752

GamutMLP: A Lightweight MLP for Color Loss Recovery

2023· article· en· W4386076237 on OpenAlexafffund
Hoang Le, Brian Price, Scott Cohen, Michael S. Brown

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGamutComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRGB color modelColor spaceComputer visionRGB color spaceLightnessColor depthColor balanceColor constancyClipping (morphology)Color managementComputer graphics (images)Color imageImage processingImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cameras and image-editing software often process images in the wide-gamut ProPhoto color space, encompassing 90% of all visible colors. However, when images are encoded for sharing, this color-rich representation is transformed and clipped to fit within the small-gamut standard RGB (sRGB) color space, representing only 30% of visible colors. Recovering the lost color information is challenging due to the clipping procedure. Inspired by neural implicit representations for 2D images, we propose a method that optimizes a lightweight multi-layer-perceptron (MLP) model during the gamut reduction step to predict the clipped values. GamutMLP takes approximately 2 seconds to optimize and requires only 23 KB of storage. The small memory footprint allows our GamutMLP model to be saved as metadata in the sRGB image—the model can be extracted when needed to restore wide-gamut color values. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach for color recovery and compare it with alternative strategies, including pre-trained DNN-based gamut expansion networks and other implicit neural representation methods. As part of this effort, we introduce a new color gamut dataset of 2200 wide-gamut/small-gamut images for training and testing.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.585
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207