MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392348711 · doi:10.18280/ts.410146

Enhancing Intrinsic Image Decomposition with Transformer and Laplacian Pyramid Network

2024· article· en· W4392348711 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jianxin Liu, Yupeng Ma, Shan Zhang, Zhiguo Liu, Yufei Song

Bibliographic record

VenueTraitement du signal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Image Fusion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceTransformerPyramid (geometry)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionSegmentationLaplace operatorBenchmark (surveying)Feature extractionPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsEngineeringGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intrinsic Image Decomposition (IID) remains a pivotal challenge in the domain of computer vision, with applications spanning image editing, color image denoising, and segmentation, among others.Despite notable successes, there exists a significant opportunity for enhancing the feature encoding process to improve the accuracy of predicted outcomes.In response to this, a novel framework, termed Transformer and Laplacian Pyramid Network (TLPNet), is introduced.TLPNet comprises two distinct sub-networks: the Transformer for Reflectance Network (TRNet) and the Laplacian Pyramid for Shading Network (LPSNet).Within this framework, the Transformer module is strategically employed within the reflectance imaging component to effectively address the challenge of inadequate feature information extraction.Comprehensive experiments conducted on the ShapeNet Dataset and MIT Dataset have demonstrated the efficacy of TLPNet in predicting more accurate reflectance and shading images.This study contributes to the field by presenting an innovative approach that leverages the strengths of transformer models and Laplacian pyramid structures for the task of IID, setting a new benchmark for future research in the area.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTraitement du signalSame topicAdvanced Image Fusion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207