ArticleJournal of imaging2023
Performance Comparison of Classical Methods and Neural Networks for Colour Correction.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization of RGB-Polarization Sensor-Based Cameras.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- Evaluation of Color Difference Models for Wide Color Gamut and High Dynamic Range.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Colour correction is the process of converting RAW RGB pixel values of digital cameras to a standard colour space such as CIE XYZ. A range of regression methods including linear, polynomial and root-polynomial least-squares have been deployed. However, in recent years, various neural network (NN) models have also started to appear in the literature as an alternative to classical methods. In the first part of this paper, a leading neural network approach is compared and contrasted with regression methods. We find that, although the neural network model supports improved colour correction compared with simple least-squares regression, it performs less well than the more advanced root-polynomial regression. Moreover, the relative improvement afforded by NNs, compared to linear least-squares, is diminished when the regression methods are adapted to minimise a perceptual colour error. Problematically, unlike linear and root-polynomial regressions, the NN approach is tied to a fixed exposure (and when exposure changes, the afforded colour correction can be quite poor). We explore two solutions that make NNs more exposure-invariant. First, we use data augmentation to train the NN for a range of typical exposures and second, we propose a new NN architecture which, by construction, is exposure-invariant. Finally, we look into how the performance of these algorithms is influenced when models are trained and tested on different datasets. As expected, the performance of all methods drops when tested with completely different datasets. However, we noticed that the regression methods still outperform the NNs in terms of colour correction, even though the relative performance of the regression methods does change based on the train and test datasets.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.