MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414197457 · doi:10.1109/cvprw67362.2025.00136

Retinex-Guided Histogram Transformer for Mask-Free Shadow Removal

2025· article· en· W4414197457 on OpenAlexaff
Wei Dong, Han Zhou, Seyed Amirreza Mousavi, Jun Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular and Laser Science Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColor constancyHistogramResidualShadow (psychology)TransformerPipeline (software)Leverage (statistics)Benchmark (surveying)Inference

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While deep learning methods have achieved notable progress in shadow removal, many existing approaches rely on shadow masks that are difficult to obtain, limiting their generalization to real-world scenes. In this work, we propose ReHiT, an efficient mask-free shadow removal framework based on a hybrid CNN-Transformer architecture guided by Retinex theory. We first introduce a dual-branch pipeline to separately model reflectance and illumination components, and each is restored by our developed Illumination-Guided Hybrid CNN-Transformer (IG-HCT) module. Second, besides the CNN-based blocks that are capable of learning residual dense features and performing multi-scale semantic fusion, multi-scale semantic fusion, we develop the Illumination-Guided Histogram Transformer Block (IGHB) to effectively handle non-uniform illumination and spatially complex shadows. Extensive experiments on several benchmark datasets validate the effectiveness of our approach over existing mask-free methods. Trained solely on the NTIRE 2025 Shadow Removal Challenge dataset, our solution delivers competitive results with one of the smallest parameter sizes and fastest inference speeds among top-ranked entries, highlighting its applicability for real-world applications with limited computational resources. The code is available at https://github.com/dongw22/oath.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.338 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOcular and Laser Science ResearchFrench-language works237,207