Improved mapping between illuminations and sensors for RAW images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RAW images are unprocessed camera sensor output with sensor-specific RGB values based on the sensor's color filter spectral sensitivities. RAW images also incur strong color casts due to the sensor's response to the spectral properties of scene illumination. The sensor- and illumination-specific nature of RAW images makes it challenging to capture RAW datasets for deep learning methods, as scenes need to be captured for each sensor and under a wide range of illumination. Methods for illumination augmentation for a given sensor and the ability to map RAW images between sensors are important for reducing the burden of data capture. To explore this problem, we introduce what we believe to be a first-of-its-kind dataset comprising carefully captured scenes under a wide range of illumination. Specifically, we use a customized lightbox with tunable illumination spectra to capture several scenes with different cameras. Our illumination and sensor mapping dataset has 390 illuminations, four cameras, and 18 scenes. Using this dataset, we introduce a lightweight neural network approach for illumination and sensor mapping that outperforms competing methods. We demonstrate the utility of our approach on the downstream task of training a neural ISP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".