2019
DOI: 10.3788/aos201939.0115003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Coarse-to-Fine Saliency Detection Based on Non-Subsampled Contourlet Transform Enhancement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Table 1 shows the quantitative evaluation of different defogging methods on the SOTS dataset. It can be seen that the quantitative evaluation metrics of the recovered results using [4,5] were low, while the quantitative evaluation metrics of the recovered results using these deep learning methods in [9,10] were improved to some extent. The algorithm in this paper was 6.36 and 0.08 higher than that in [9] in the PSNR and SSIM, respectively, and only below that in [15] in both the PSNR and SSIM.…”
Section: Experimental Results Of Synthesizing Uniform Haze Imagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Table 1 shows the quantitative evaluation of different defogging methods on the SOTS dataset. It can be seen that the quantitative evaluation metrics of the recovered results using [4,5] were low, while the quantitative evaluation metrics of the recovered results using these deep learning methods in [9,10] were improved to some extent. The algorithm in this paper was 6.36 and 0.08 higher than that in [9] in the PSNR and SSIM, respectively, and only below that in [15] in both the PSNR and SSIM.…”
Section: Experimental Results Of Synthesizing Uniform Haze Imagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to verify the effect of the model in this paper on recovering real foggy images, four real outdoor foggy images were selected for the defogging experiments, and the experimental results are shown in Figure 7. There was overexposure in the sky region after the method in [4] for haze removal (e.g., panels 2 and 3 of Figure 7b) and more serious color bias in the processed images (e.g., panel 4 of Figure 7b). The defogged image of the method in [5] solved the defect of the method in [4], in which the halo appeared in the sky region, but the serious problem of color bias of the processed image remains unresolved (e.g., the fourth panel of Figure 7b).…”
Section: Experimental Results Of Real Haze Imagesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations