Optimisation of digital preservation and 3D reconstruction of frescoes based on image processing algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is based on the digital image processing technology, using the undamaged image information to restore and protect the frescoes. The discrete binary wavelet change is used to decompose and denoise the image signal. And decompose and filter the high-frequency component and low-frequency component of the image, choose different components, respectively, carry out coefficient transformation, and solve the OMP least-paradigm for different random matrices. The color space is selected, and the mural color space is channel decomposed according to the grayscale mode and restored separately. Establish an assumed datum for each independent face of the mural, establish a spatial coordinate system for it, realize the transformation of spatial coordinates, and realize the super-resolution three-dimensional reconstruction of the mural based on the generative adversarial network and the self-attention mechanism. Objective evaluation indexes and subjective evaluation indexes are established to compare the protection effect of different algorithms on murals. Compared with the traditional algorithm CDD, this paper’s algorithm improves the restoration time by 9.545~15.625 s, and the peak signal-to-noise ratio index improves by 1.35~4.769 db. In the results of the image extraction and processing, the calculated values of discrete curvature of the mural segments AB, CD, and EF ranges from -0.00945 to -0.00478, and the difference of standard deviation of the curvature from the target curvature is 6.477%. The approximate target curvature is obtained, and the algorithm has strong adaptive ability.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".