Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 495

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Statistics of natural images and models

Open access
Jinggang Huang, Mumford, D.·2003·Proceedings. 1999 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Cat. No PR00149)

Abstract

Large calibrated datasets of 'random' natural images have recently become available. These make possible precise and intensive statistical studies of the local nature of images. We report results ranging from the simplest single pixel intensity to joint distribution of 3 Haar wavelet responses. Some of these statistics shed light on old issues such as the near scale-invariance of image statistics and some are entirely new. We fit mathematical models to some of the statistics and explain others in terms of local image features.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.1999.786990

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 495

Metadata

Authors
Huang, J., & Mumford, D.
Venue
Proceedings. 1999 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Cat. No PR00149)
Published
2003-01-20
Pages
541-547
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139643804
Cited by
495
References
0
FWCI
25.66
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Statistics of natural images and models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/cvpr.1999.786990
The paper
Huang, J., & Mumford, D. (2003). Statistics of natural images and models. Proceedings. 1999 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Cat. No PR00149). https://doi.org/10.1109/cvpr.1999.786990

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.