Cited by 375Image and Signal Denoising MethodsImage Retrieval and Classification TechniquesAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Internal statistics of a single natural image

Zontak, Maria, Irani, Michal·2011·CVPR 2011

Abstract

Statistics of `natural images' provides useful priors for solving under-constrained problems in Computer Vision. Such statistics is usually obtained from large collections of natural images. We claim that the substantial internal data redundancy within a single natural image (e.g., recurrence of small image patches), gives rise to powerful internal statistics, obtained directly from the image itself. While internal patch recurrence has been used in various applications, we provide a parametric quantification of this property. We show that the likelihood of an image patch to recur at another image location can be expressed parametricly as a function of the spatial distance from the patch, and its gradient content. This “internal parametric prior” is used to improve existing algorithms that rely on patch recurrence. Moreover, we show that internal image-specific statistics is often more powerful than general external statistics, giving rise to more powerful image-specific priors. In particular: (i) Patches tend to recur much more frequently (densely) inside the same image, than in any random external collection of natural images. (ii) To find an equally good external representative patch for all the patches of an image, requires an external database of hundreds of natural images. (iii) Internal statistics often has stronger predictive power than external statistics, indicating that it may potentially give rise to more powerful image-specific priors.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2011.5995401

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. 10.1109/CVPR.2007.383092 · DOI
  2. zhu, 1997, Prior learning and gibbs reaction-diffusion, PAMI, 19
  3. 10.1109/CVPR.2005.160 · DOI
  4. 10.1109/ICCV.2007.4408924 · DOI
  5. 10.1016/S0042-6989(97)00169-7 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1214/aoms/1177704472 · DOI
  7. 10.1109/CVPR.2008.4587598 · DOI
  8. barnes, 2010, The generalized patchmatch correspondence algorithm, ECCV
  9. 10.1109/TSP.2006.881199 · DOI
  10. 10.1109/ICCV.2003.1238311 · DOI
  11. 10.1109/ICCV.1999.790383 · DOI
  12. dabov, 2007, Image denoising by sparse 3d transform-domain collaborative filtering, IEEE T-IP, 16
  13. 10.1109/CVPR.2005.38 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1109/38.988747 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 375

Metadata

Authors
Zontak, M., & Irani, M.
Affiliations
Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
Venue
CVPR 2011
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2011-06
Pages
977-984
OpenAlex
W2062811295
Cited by
375
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 33 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 15
FWCI
16.71
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Signal Denoising Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image Retrieval and Classification Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Keywords
natural image statistics, image patches, spatial distance

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