MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402278323 · doi:10.3390/rs16173299

Stripe Noise Elimination with a Novel Trend Repair Method for Push-Broom Thermal Images

2024· article· en· W4402278323 on OpenAlexaff
Zelin Zhang, Hua Li, Yongming Du, Yao Chen, Guoxiang Zhao, Zunjian Bian, Biao Cao, Qing Xiao, Qinhuo Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroomNoise (video)Remote sensingOpticsComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceGeologyArtificial intelligencePhysicsImage (mathematics)Geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stripe noise is a general phenomenon in original remote sensing images that both degrades image quality and severely limits its quantitative application. While the classical statistical method is effective in correcting common stripes caused by inaccurately calibrating relative gains and offsets between detectors, it falls short in correcting other nonlinear stripe noises originating from subtle nonlinear changes or random contamination within the same detector. Therefore, this paper proposes a novel trend repair method based on two normal columns directly adjacent to a defective column to rectify the trend by considering the geospatial structure of contaminated pixels, eliminating residual stripe noise evident in level 0 (L0) remote sensing images after histogram matching. GF5-02 VIMI (Gaofen5-02, visual and infrared multispectral imager) images and simulated Landsat 8 thermal infrared sensor (TIRS) images deliberately infused with stripe noise are selected to test the new method and two other existing methods, the piece-wise method and the iterated weighted least squares (WLS) method. The effectiveness of these three methods is reflected by streaking metrics (Streaking), structural similarity (SSIM), peak signal-to-noise ratio (PSNR), and improvement factor (IF) on the uniformity, structure, and information content of the corrected GF5-02 VIMI images and by the accuracy of the corrected simulated Landsat 8 TIRS images. The experimental results indicate that the trend repair method proposed in this paper removes nonlinear stripe noise effectively, making the results of IF > 20. The remaining indicators also show satisfactory results; in particular, the mean accuracy derived from the simulated image remains below a digital number (DN) of 15, which is far superior to the other two methods.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207