The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Revised Underwater Image Formation Model
Abstract
The current underwater image formation model descends from atmospheric dehazing equations where attenuation is a weak function of wavelength. We recently showed that this model introduces significant errors and dependencies in the estimation of the direct transmission signal because underwater, light attenuates in a wavelength-dependent manner. Here, we show that the backscattered signal derived from the current model also suffers from dependencies that were previously unaccounted for. In doing so, we use oceanographic measurements to derive the physically valid space of backscatter, and further show that the wideband coefficients that govern backscatter are different than those that govern direct transmission, even though the current model treats them to be the same. We propose a revised equation for underwater image formation that takes these differences into account, and validate it through in situ experiments underwater. This revised model might explain frequent instabilities of current underwater color reconstruction models, and calls for the development of new methods.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Underwater Image Restoration Using Geodesic Color Distance and Complete Image Formation Model
Park, E., & Sim, J.-Y. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3019767 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Akkaynak, D., & Treibitz, T.
- Venue
- 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2018-06
- Pages
- 6723-6732
- ISSN
- 1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2798898057
- Cited by
- 457
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.31
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.