MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W778700221

Demosaicing Algorithm by Gradient Edge Detection Filtering on Color Component

2009· article· en· W778700221 on OpenAlexaff
Gwanggil Jeon, Tae‐Young Jung, Dong‐Hyung Kim, Seungjong Kim, Jechang Jeong, Regular Members

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemosaicingColor filter arrayArtificial intelligenceComputer visionBayer filterChannel (broadcasting)LuminanceColor imageEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionInterpolation (computer graphics)Computer scienceColor balanceImage gradientColor gelMathematicsImage (mathematics)Image processingLayer (electronics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Digital cameras adopting a single CCD detector collect image color by subsampling in three color planes and successively interpolating the information to reconstruct full-resolution color images. Therefore, to recovery of a full-resolution color image from a color filter array (CFA) like the Bayer pattern is generally considered as an interpolation issue for the unknown color components. In this paper, we first calculate luminance component value by combining R, G, B channel component information which is quite different from the conventional demosaicing algorithm. Because conventional system calculates G channel component followed by computing R and B channel components. Integrating the obtained gradient edge information and the improved weighting function in luminance component, a new edge sensitive demosaicing technique is presented. Based on 24 well known testing images, simulation results proved that our presented high-quality demosaicing technique shows the best image quality performance when compared with several recently presented techniques.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Korean Institute of Communications and Information SciencesSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207