Learning to Recover Spectral Reflectance From RGB Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper tackles spectral reflectance recovery (SRR) from RGB images. Since capturing ground-truth spectral reflectance and camera spectral sensitivity are challenging and costly, most existing approaches are trained on synthetic images and utilize the same parameters for all unseen testing images, which are suboptimal especially when the trained models are tested on real images because they never exploit the internal information of the testing images. To address this issue, we adopt a self-supervised meta-auxiliary learning (MAXL) strategy that fine-tunes the well-trained network parameters with each testing image to combine external with internal information. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work that successfully adapts the MAXL strategy to this problem. Instead of relying on naive end-to-end training, we also propose a novel architecture that integrates the physical relationship between the spectral reflectance and the corresponding RGB images into the network based on our mathematical analysis. Besides, since the spectral reflectance of a scene is independent to its illumination while the corresponding RGB images are not, we recover the spectral reflectance of a scene from its RGB images captured under multiple illuminations to further reduce the unknown. Qualitative and quantitative evaluations demonstrate the effectiveness of our proposed network and of the MAXL. Our code and data are available at https://github.com/Dong-Huo/SRR-MAXL.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".