MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409793708 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127a-238

Digital Protection and Recovery Method of Traditional Paper Horse Art Based on Image Processing Technology

2025· article· en· W4409793708 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Media and Visual Art
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceImage processingComputer visionDigital image processingArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The argument of the article comes from the rapid development of digital technology and the urgent need for the digital protection and restoration of traditional paper horse art.For this reason, this paper proposes a method of digital protection and restoration of traditional paper horse art based on graphics processing technology.The traditional paper horse art image is collected, the image is denoised using mean filtering, the paper horse image is decomposed in gray scale through spatial conversion, and then its double histogram equalization is processed to obtain the color-enhanced image.Combined with the convolutional image restoration strategy, the paper horse art is digitally displayed.The method of this paper can enhance the color of the paper horse art image and retain the original details, and at the same time, in terms of the clarity effect, the method of this paper improves the comparison method by 25.27%~339.39%.In addition, the method in this paper has better image restoration quality with subjective evaluation rating 4 and higher PSNR and SSIM.What's more, the scores on the evaluation dimension of digital preservation and restoration effect ranged from 4.02 to 4.48, and the overall effect performance was relatively good.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicDigital Media and Visual ArtFrench-language works237,207