The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Robust Multi-Exposure Image Fusion: A Structural Patch Decomposition Approach
Abstract
We propose a simple yet effective structural patch decomposition approach for multi-exposure image fusion (MEF) that is robust to ghosting effect. We decompose an image patch into three conceptually independent components: signal strength, signal structure, and mean intensity. Upon fusing these three components separately, we reconstruct a desired patch and place it back into the fused image. This novel patch decomposition approach benefits MEF in many aspects. First, as opposed to most pixel-wise MEF methods, the proposed algorithm does not require post-processing steps to improve visual quality or to reduce spatial artifacts. Second, it handles RGB color channels jointly, and thus produces fused images with more vivid color appearance. Third and most importantly, the direction of the signal structure component in the patch vector space provides ideal information for ghost removal. It allows us to reliably and efficiently reject inconsistent object motions with respect to a chosen reference image without performing computationally expensive motion estimation. We compare the proposed algorithm with 12 MEF methods on 21 static scenes and 12 deghosting schemes on 19 dynamic scenes (with camera and object motion). Extensive experimental results demonstrate that the proposed algorithm not only outperforms previous MEF algorithms on static scenes but also consistently produces high quality fused images with little ghosting artifacts for dynamic scenes. Moreover, it maintains a lower computational cost compared with the state-of-the-art deghosting schemes.
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
Cites
Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity
Wang, Z., Bovik, A. C., Sheikh, H. R., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2003.819861 · Cited by 57,892
Self-citationDistinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints
Lowe, D. G. (2004) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1023/b:visi.0000029664.99615.94 · Cited by 55,589
Bilateral Filtering for Gray and Color Images
Tomasi, C., & Manduchi, R. (2002) · Sixth International Conference on Computer Vision (IEEE Cat. No.98CH36271) · doi:10.1109/iccv.1998.710815 · Cited by 8,177 · cited 1×
“H. Yong is with the Department of Computing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong, and also with the Institute for Information and System Sciences and Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Intelligent Networks and Network Security, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China…”
BackgroundImage registration methods: a survey
Zitová, B., & Flusser, J. (2003) · Image and Vision Computing · doi:10.1016/s0262-8856(03)00137-9 · Cited by 6,423
The Laplacian pyramid as a compact image code
Burt, P., & Adelson, E. (1983) · IEEE Transactions on Communications · doi:10.1109/tcom.1983.1095851 · Cited by 6,077
He, K., Sun, J., & Tang, X. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2012.213 · Cited by 5,546
A survey of image registration techniques
Brown, L. G. (1992) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/146370.146374 · Cited by 4,057
Region Filling and Object Removal by Exemplar-Based Image Inpainting
Criminisi, A., Perez, P., & Toyama, K. (2004) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2004.833105 · Cited by 3,258 · cited 1×
“For Hu13 [20], motion estimation using generalized PatchMatch contributes to the main computation compared with updating the latent image and refining the IMF, which has a complexity of O(Ii N2(M log M)K ).”
MethodRecovering high dynamic range radiance maps from photographs
Debevec, P. E., & Malik, J. (2008) · ACM SIGGRAPH 2008 classes · doi:10.1145/1401132.1401174 · Cited by 2,399
Image Fusion With Guided Filtering
Li, S., Kang, X., & Hu, J. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2013.2244222 · Cited by 1,781
Cited by
SwinFusion: Cross-domain Long-range Learning for General Image Fusion via Swin Transformer
Ma, J., Tang, L., Fan, F., Huang, J., Mei, X., & Ma, Y. (2022) · IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica · doi:10.1109/jas.2022.105686 · Cited by 1,526
Learning a Deep Single Image Contrast Enhancer from Multi-Exposure Images
Cai, J., Gu, S., & Zhang, L. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Image Processing · doi:10.1109/tip.2018.2794218 · Cited by 1,234
Self-citationSDNet: A Versatile Squeeze-and-Decomposition Network for Real-Time Image Fusion
Zhang, H., & Ma, J. (2021) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-021-01501-8 · Cited by 747
Zhu, Z., Zheng, M., Qi, G., Wang, D., & Xiang, Y. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2898111 · Cited by 328
Image dehazing by artificial multiple-exposure image fusion
Galdran, A. (2018) · Signal Processing · doi:10.1016/j.sigpro.2018.03.008 · Cited by 287
Metadata
- Authors
- Ma, K., Li, H., Yong, H., Wang, Z., Meng, D., & Zhang, L.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Image Processing
- Published
- 2017-05
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 2519-2532
- ISSN
- 1057-7149 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-0042
- OpenAlex
- W2590560192
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 25.59
- Type
- journal article
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Robust Multi-Exposure Image Fusion: A Structural Patch Decomposition Approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tip.2017.2671921
- The paper
- Ma, K., Li, H., Yong, H., Wang, Z., Meng, D., & Zhang, L. (2017). Robust Multi-Exposure Image Fusion: A Structural Patch Decomposition Approach. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing. https://doi.org/10.1109/tip.2017.2671921
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.