MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416944645 · doi:10.1145/3779223

Toward Efficient Underwater Visual Perception through Image Enhancement, Compression, and Understanding

2025· article· en· W4416944645 on OpenAlexafffund
Lei Sheng, Kaitao Wu, Azzedine Boukerche, Libo Long, Qiuling Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Computing Surveys · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsUnderwaterImage processingPerceptionNoise (video)Image qualityImage compressionImage (mathematics)VisualizationVisual perception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The growing demand for marine exploration, environmental monitoring, and autonomous underwater operations has elevated the role of underwater image processing in both research and practical applications. However, the acquisition and transmission of underwater visual data are fundamentally constrained by the harsh aquatic environment, where factors such as limited bandwidth, strong light scattering, color distortion, and complex noise severely degrade image quality and restrict data throughput. These challenges not only hinder real-time perception and decision-making but also affect the efficiency of data-driven tasks such as mapping, object recognition, and navigation. To address these issues, a broad spectrum of underwater image processing methods has emerged, aiming to enhance visual clarity, compress data for efficient transmission, restore degraded signals, and enable accurate scene understanding. This survey provides a structured and comprehensive review of existing techniques, categorizing them into four core domains: image enhancement, image restoration, image compression and segmentation, and image classification. Representative methods within each domain are critically analyzed in terms of their underlying principles, computational complexity, and applicability across diverse underwater scenarios. Furthermore, the survey highlights emerging trends including deep learning-based approaches, cross-modal information fusion, and resource-efficient designs, offering insights for future development in underwater visual computing and communication systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Computing SurveysSame topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207