Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 89 references

Attention Guided Low-light Image Enhancement with a Large Scale Low-light Simulation Dataset

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Low-light enhancement works when a network is guided by learned maps of underexposure and noise.

desk verdict A useful large synthetic paired low-light dataset and a reasonable attention-guided network, but the 'large margin' claim rests on in-distribution synthetic evaluation and is not backed by the real-data results. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.00682 v3 pith:QC53RTJ5 submitted 2019-08-02 eess.IV cs.CV

Feifan Lv , Yu Li , Feng Lu This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.IVcs.CV
keywords low-lightimageenhancementattentionmapunderexposureestimationdenoisingsyntheticdatasetmulti-branchconvolutionalnetworkGaussian-Poissonnoisesimulation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper's thesis is that low-light enhancement should not be a single global brightness adjustment: the right model locates where the image is underexposed and where noise hides, then uses those two maps to brighten and denoise different regions at different strengths. To get enough training data, the paper builds a large synthetic low-light dataset by darkening well-exposed photographs with a linear-plus-gamma transform ($\beta(\alpha I)^\gamma$) and adding Gaussian-Poisson noise, while constructing sharper, higher-contrast reference images through exposure fusion. On its synthetic test set the pipeline reports large gains over prior methods, with PSNR 25.24 versus 24.21 for the next best method without extra noise, and 20.84 versus 19.86 with noise. On real captured benchmarks it reports better or comparable quality with a lighter network than prior end-to-end systems, supporting the claim that synthetic training plus light real-data fine-tuning transfers to real photographs.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the two supervised guidance maps and the multi-branch network they steer. The underexposure attention map is $A=|\max_c(I)-\max_c(F(I))|/\max_c(I)$, where $I$ is the bright image and $F(I)$ is its synthetic dark version; the noise map is $N=\max_c(|F_n(I)-F(I)|/F(I))$, where $F_n(I)$ is the noisy dark image. Both maps take values in [0,1] and tell the Enhancement-Net where to enhance and where to denoise strongly. The Enhancement-Net is a feature-extraction stream whose per-layer outputs feed five differently structured enhancement modules (large-kernel, encoder-decoder with and without skip connections, residual, and dilated), whose outputs are fused by 1x1 convolution, with the maps and losses weighting the result regionally. A final Reinforce-Net applies another pass for contrast and color, trained against high-contrast exposure-fused references, and a composite loss combines brightness, SSIM structure, deep-feature perceptual, and regional terms.

What would settle it

Take a camera with known sensor characteristics, shoot a fixed scene at multiple exposure and ISO settings to obtain clean references, and compare the network's enhanced output on the darkest frames against those references; if PSNR and SSIM favor the network only when the synthetic noise statistics are matched to that camera's noise and degrade sharply otherwise, the transfer assumption is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that low-light enhancement is best treated as a spatially adaptive joint problem: a network should decide, per region, how much to lift exposure and how much to denoise, rather than applying a global tone curve and then cleaning artifacts. The paper supports this with a four-subnet architecture in which an Attention-Net estimates an underexposure map and a Noise-Net estimates a noise map, both supervised from the synthetic image pairs; those maps steer a multi-branch Enhancement-Net, and a final Reinforce-Net restores contrast and color. On the synthetic test set the full model reports PSNR 25.24 without extra noise and 20.84 with noise, ahead of the compared baselines; on a real captured benchmark it reports PSNR 20.24 at 0.88M parameters versus 16.77 for the baseline trained on that benchmark. The discovery, if true, is that explicit two-map guidance plus a large, diverse synthetic training set is enough to make end-to-end enhancement and denoising transfer to real low-light photographs.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's load-bearing premise is that synthetic darkening plus standard signal-dependent Gaussian-Poisson noise captures real low-light image formation closely enough for training to transfer to real photographs, and that premise is tested only indirectly on real benchmarks.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single end-to-end network can brighten underexposed areas and suppress noise simultaneously, avoiding the blur-then-amplify trade-off of cascading denoise and enhancement.
  • Training on synthetic pairs can substitute for much of the expensive paired real low-light capture: the real-benchmark results were obtained with a network pretrained on synthetic data and only lightly adapted to the real set.
  • The two-map guidance makes enhancement input-adaptive, so well-lit regions are left mostly alone while dark regions receive stronger correction.
  • The exposure-fusion reference construction yields targets with higher contrast, preventing the regression toward slightly over-exposed or smoothed outputs seen in earlier multi-branch enhancers.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the synthetic pipeline starts from public annotated images, the same rendering could generate paired low-light data with detection or segmentation labels at scale; the paper notes this compatibility but does not quantify the gain for those tasks.
  • A direct ablation of the synthetic noise model, matching or deliberately mismatching real camera noise statistics, would isolate how much of the real-data transfer comes from the Gaussian-Poisson simulation rather than from the network architecture; the paper does not run that experiment.
  • The method trains on still images, and applying the same two-map guidance to video would require the attention maps to stay temporally consistent, which the paper does not test.
  • The paper's own Section 5.5 concedes that totally dark regions with lost texture and heavy compression produce imperfect results; the large-margin claim is best read as scoped to inputs where recoverable texture remains.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an end-to-end attention-guided multi-branch CNN for low-light image enhancement, trained on a new synthetic paired dataset. The synthetic pipeline combines a linear-plus-gamma brightness transformation (Eq. 1) with a Gaussian-Poisson noise model applied through an in-camera pipeline (Eq. 2). The network predicts two attention maps—an underexposure map and a noise map—to guide simultaneous enhancement and denoising, followed by a Reinforce-Net for contrast and color refinement. The authors report large quantitative gains on their synthetic test set (Tables 2 and 3), moderate gains on LOL after fine-tuning, and a slight loss to SID on the SID dataset (Table 4). Additional qualitative results, a user study, and an ablation study are provided.

Significance. If the synthetic-to-real transfer premise were established, the paper would make two useful contributions: a large-scale paired low-light dataset with controllable degradation levels and a network architecture that explicitly separates exposure and noise guidance. The ablation study demonstrates the individual contributions of the loss terms and attention modules, and the dataset could be a resource for future work. However, the current evaluation does not validate the headline claim of outperforming state-of-the-art methods by a large margin on real low-light images, because the main quantitative evidence is in-distribution and the real-data experiments either involve fine-tuning or show no margin. The strongest part of the paper is the architecture and dataset; the weakest is the evidence for real-world generalization.

major comments (4)
  1. [§5.1, Tables 2–3] The synthetic test set is generated by the same simulator (Eqs. 1–2) used to create the training set, and most baselines are not trained on this distribution—only GLADNet and LLNet are fine-tuned for comparison. The 'large margin' in Tables 2 and 3 is therefore an in-distribution comparison that does not demonstrate transfer to real low-light imaging. Please report results with all learning-based baselines fine-tuned on the same synthetic training split, and explicitly confirm that the 965-image test set is disjoint from the 22,656-image training subset.
  2. [§3.2, Eqs. (1)–(2)] The fidelity of the simulation to real camera degradations is not established. Figure 4 shows only a qualitative histogram match for Eq. (1) on an unspecified set of multi-exposure images, with no quantitative error. The noise model Eq. (2) is adopted from CBDNet with the statement that 'the configuration is the same as [27]', but no parameters or calibration to the cameras of LOL or SID are provided. Without a quantitative validation of the simulator against real low-light captures, the synthetic-to-real transfer premise is untested.
  3. [§5.2, Table 4] The real-data results do not support the abstract's 'large margin' claim. On LOL, the model is fine-tuned on the target dataset, so this is an adaptation result, not a zero-shot transfer result. On SID, replacing SID's network with the Enhancement-Net yields 27.96 dB PSNR versus SID's 28.88 dB and lower SSIM (0.77 vs. 0.79), which the text itself calls 'comparable'. This contradicts the headline claim. Additionally, swapping only the network component inside the SID pipeline compares an architecture module rather than an end-to-end method, making the comparison difficult to interpret.
  4. [§5.3] The generalization study on real images is purely qualitative (Figures 13–14) and the user study is subjective, comparing only four methods without reference-based metrics. There is no quantitative no-fine-tuning evaluation on a real paired low-light dataset. Please provide a direct transfer experiment—e.g., evaluating the synthetic-trained model on LOL without fine-tuning, and reporting PSNR/SSIM/LPIPS—to test whether the simulator transfers to real captures. Without such an experiment, the central claim of the paper remains conditional on the untested realism of Eqs. (1)–(2).
minor comments (6)
  1. [§4.2, Eq. (13)] The sentence 'and are the same as Lrb, Lrs and Lrp' in the Reinforce-Net loss description is confusing; it should refer to the corresponding components of the Enhancement-Net loss defined in Eqs. (9)–(11).
  2. [§3.1] The paper does not state whether the 965-image test set is disjoint from the 22,656-image training subset. Please clarify the split.
  3. [Figure 4] The caption says 'multi-exposure images' but does not specify the source, the number of images, or the exposure range used for validation. This information is needed to judge the histogram comparison.
  4. [Figure 9] The axes labels 'Bad/Good' and 'Fast/Slow' are ambiguous; please clarify which metric is plotted on each axis, and indicate the PSNR scale.
  5. [§5.2] The entries 'Ours-lightweight-1' and 'Ours-lightweight-2' are never defined in the main text; please describe the lightweight variant and the knowledge-transfer procedure (PPCN) sufficiently for reproducibility.
  6. [General] The paper cites KinD [88] and DeepUPE [73] in the related work but does not compare against KinD in the experiments. Adding KinD to the real-dataset comparison would strengthen the evaluation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the method is a supervised fit to a synthetic degradation model, evaluated in-distribution and on external real benchmarks, with no load-bearing self-citation or definitional reduction.

full rationale

The paper's claimed derivation chain is empirical rather than formal: Eq. 1 and Eq. 2 define a synthetic degradation model, and the network is trained with supervised losses (Eqs. 5-13) on pairs generated from that model. No theorem is derived from the model, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction: the ue-attention and noise maps (Eqs. 3-4) are deterministic supervision targets computed from the same simulator that generates the training pairs, so the network's ability to predict them is a supervised-learning fit, not a circular inference. Tables 2 and 3 measure performance on a held-out test set drawn from the same simulator; this is an in-distribution evaluation, so it supports the claim that the model fits its training distribution with a large margin, but it does not by itself establish transfer to real captures. That is a validity caveat, not a circularity. The real-data evaluations on LOL and SID in Section 5.2 are external benchmarks, and the comparison there is explicit about fine-tuning on LOL or replacing only the network under the SID configuration; none of the load-bearing claims reduces to a self-citation. The self-citations [51,52] are baselines and related work, not justifications of the method's uniqueness or correctness. Therefore no step in the paper's chain is equivalent to its inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends mainly on the assumption that a synthetic degradation model can stand in for real low-light image formation, plus a set of hand-chosen simulation ranges and loss weights. The attention and noise maps are not free parameters; they are deterministic functions of the known synthetic pairs, which is why they are not listed as invented entities.

free parameters (3)
  • Simulation brightness parameters alpha, beta, gamma sampling ranges = alpha ~ U(0.9,1), beta ~ U(0.5,1), gamma ~ U(1.5,5)
    Chosen by hand to approximate real underexposure; they define the synthetic training distribution and therefore the behavior of the trained model.
  • Noise variances sigma_p, sigma_g = not specified in text, same config as [27]
    The Gaussian-Poisson noise model in Eq. 2 requires noise variances; values are borrowed from [27] rather than estimated on the target data.
  • Loss weights (omega_a, omega_n, omega_e, omega_r, omega_eb, omega_es, omega_ep, omega_er, omega_rb, omega_rs… = {100,10,10,1}, {1,1,0.35,5}, {1,1,0.35}, lambda=10
    Loss weights are set empirically and directly control the trade-off between brightness, structure, perceptual quality, and regional focus in the reported metrics.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Synthetic low-light images generated by Eq. 1 and Eq. 2 are representative of real low-light images.
    Section 3.2; this is the basis for training on synthetic pairs and evaluating transfer to LOL, SID, and natural images.
  • domain assumption The Gaussian-Poisson noise model with the in-camera pipeline (Eq. 2) captures real low-light noise.
    Section 3.2, following [27]; if the noise model is wrong, the noise map supervision and denoising behavior will not transfer.
  • domain assumption Exposure fusion (Mertens) and L0 smoothing produce a desirable high-quality ground truth for the Reinforce-Net.
    Section 3.2; the high-contrast reference images are synthesized, not captured, so their quality is assumed better than the original bright images.
  • domain assumption PSNR, SSIM, LPIPS, VIF, LOE, TMQI, and AB are valid proxies for perceptual enhancement quality.
    Section 5; all quantitative conclusions rely on these metrics.
  • domain assumption VGG-19 pretrained features provide a useful perceptual loss for low-light enhancement.
    Section 4.2, Eq. 11; assumed transfer from ImageNet features to enhancement quality.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Attention Guided Low-light Image Enhancement with a Large Scale Low-light Simulation Dataset." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QC53RTJ5

@misc{pith2026190800682,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Attention Guided Low-light Image Enhancement with a Large Scale Low-light Simulation Dataset},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QC53RTJ5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.00682}
}
read the original abstract

Low-light image enhancement is challenging in that it needs to consider not only brightness recovery but also complex issues like color distortion and noise, which usually hide in the dark. Simply adjusting the brightness of a low-light image will inevitably amplify those artifacts. To address this difficult problem, this paper proposes a novel end-to-end attention-guided method based on multi-branch convolutional neural network. To this end, we first construct a synthetic dataset with carefully designed low-light simulation strategies. The dataset is much larger and more diverse than existing ones. With the new dataset for training, our method learns two attention maps to guide the brightness enhancement and denoising tasks respectively. The first attention map distinguishes underexposed regions from well lit regions, and the second attention map distinguishes noises from real textures. With their guidance, the proposed multi-branch decomposition-and-fusion enhancement network works in an input adaptive way. Moreover, a reinforcement-net further enhances color and contrast of the output image. Extensive experiments on multiple datasets demonstrate that our method can produce high fidelity enhancement results for low-light images and outperforms the current state-of-the-art methods by a large margin both quantitatively and visually.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.00682 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Low-light enhancement example. Comparing with existing methods, our method can generate results with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Pipeline of constructing the proposed low-light simulation dataset. Our method optimally selects normal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Samples of large-scale public datasets: (left) low [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (13 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Verification of the low-light simulation method: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Comparison with existing paired low-light datasets. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The proposed network with four subnets. The Attention-Net and Noise-Net are used to estimate the atten [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparison between our ue-attention map and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Visual comparison on synthetic low-light images. We fine tune the GLADNet [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Runtime and performance comparison of differ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Visual comparison on the LOL dataset (row 1 and 2) and the SID dataset (row 3). Please zoom in for a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Visual comparison of real low-light images, which are taken at night. Please zoom in for a better view. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: shows the rating distribution of the user study. Our method receives more “best” ratings, which shows that our results are more preferred by human subjects. Generalization study. To prove the robustness of our method, we directly apply our trained model to en￾hance so…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Generalizing our method to enhance (upper) monochrome surveillance scenes and (bottom) nighttime [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png]
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: After processing the low-light scene (upper row) with our method, the performance of both object detection [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_14.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: This image has totally dark region where tex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Visual comparison of several low-level vision [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_16.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

89 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages

  1. [27]

    IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2019)

    Guo, S., Yan, Z., Zhang, K., Zuo, W., Zhang, L.: Toward convolutional blind denoising of real photographs. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2019)

    work page 2019

  2. [1]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.04467 (2016)

    Abadi, M., Agarwal, A., Barham, P., Brevdo, E., Chen, Z., Citro, C., Corrado, G.S., Davis, A., Dean, J., Devin, M., et al.: Tensorflow: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous distributed systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.04467 (2016)

    arXiv 2016

  3. [2]

    https: //github.com/matterport/Mask_RCNN (2017)

    Abdulla, W.: Mask r-cnn for object detection and in- stance segmentation on keras and tensorflow. https: //github.com/matterport/Mask_RCNN (2017)

    2017

  4. [3]

    IEEE Transactions on Pat- tern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI) 34(11), 2274–2282 (2012)

    Achanta, R., Shaji, A., Smith, K., Lucchi, A., Fua, P., S¨ usstrunk, S.: Slic superpixels compared to state-of-the- art superpixel methods. IEEE Transactions on Pat- tern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI) 34(11), 2274–2282 (2012)

    2012

  5. [4]

    Arici, T., Dikbas, S., Altunbasak, Y.: A histogram modi- fication framework and its application for image contrast enhancement. IEEE Transactions on image processing (TIP) 18(9), 1921–1935 (2009) Haze OursDehazeNetHe Noise OursBM3D DenoiseNet OursGrayscale Zhang Lizuka Defocus blur Ours Photoshop SmartDeblur OursBilinear SRCNN RCAN OursMotion blur Pan DeblurGAN

    2009

  6. [5]

    IEEE signal processing letters 23(8), 1086–1090 (2016)

    Azzari, L., Foi, A.: Variance stabilization for noisy+ es- timate combination in iterative poisson denoising. IEEE signal processing letters 23(8), 1086–1090 (2016)

    2016

  7. [6]

    Bileschi, S.M.: Streetscenes: Towards scene understand- ing in still images. Tech. rep., MASSACHUSETTS INST OF TECH CAMBRIDGE (2006)

    2006

  8. [7]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 25(11), 5187– 5198 (2016)

    Cai, B., Xu, X., Jia, K., Qing, C., Tao, D.: Dehazenet: An end-to-end system for single image haze removal. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 25(11), 5187– 5198 (2016)

    2016

Show all 89 references
  1. [8]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 27(4), 2049– 2062 (2018)

    Cai, J., Gu, S., Zhang, L.: Learning a deep single im- age contrast enhancer from multi-exposure images. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 27(4), 2049– 2062 (2018)

    2018

  2. [9]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Pro- cessing (TIP) 20(12), 3431–3441 (2011)

    Celik, T., Tjahjadi, T.: Contextual and variational con- trast enhancement. IEEE Transactions on Image Pro- cessing (TIP) 20(12), 3431–3441 (2011)

    2011

  3. [10]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    Chen, C., Chen, Q.C., Xu, J., Koltun, V.: Learning to see in the dark. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    2018

  4. [11]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    Chen, J., Chen, J., Chao, H., Yang, M.: Image blind de- noising with generative adversarial network based noise modeling. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    2018

  5. [12]

    IEEE International Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2017)

    Chen, Q., xu, J., Koltun, V.: Fast image processing with fully-convolutional networks. IEEE International Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2017)

    2017

  6. [13]

    ment from photographs with gans

    Chen, Y.S., Wang, Y.C., Kao, M.H., Chuang, Y.Y.: Deep photo enhancer: Unpaired learning for image enhance- 16 Feifan Lv et al. ment from photographs with gans. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    2018

  7. [14]

    IEEE transactions on image processing (TIP) 15(8), 2290–2302 (2006)

    Chen, Z., Abidi, B.R., Page, D.L., Abidi, M.A.: Gray- level grouping (glg): an automatic method for optimized image contrast enhancement-part i: the basic method. IEEE transactions on image processing (TIP) 15(8), 2290–2302 (2006)

    2006

  8. [15]

    https://github.com/ keras-team/keras (2015)

    Chollet, F., et al.: Keras. https://github.com/ keras-team/keras (2015)

    2015

  9. [16]

    In: Image Processing: Algorithms and Systems, Neural Networks, and Machine Learning, vol

    Dabov, K., Foi, A., Katkovnik, V., Egiazarian, K.: Image denoising with block-matching and 3d filtering. In: Image Processing: Algorithms and Systems, Neural Networks, and Machine Learning, vol. 6064, p. 606414 (2006)

    2006

  10. [17]

    International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) (2019)

    Dai, D., Sakaridis, C., Hecker, S., Van Gool, L.: Model adaptation with synthetic and real data for semantic dense foggy scene understanding. International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) (2019)

    2019

  11. [18]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2018)

    Dai, D., Van Gool, L.: Dark model adaptation: Semantic image segmentation from daytime to nighttime. In: IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2018)

    2018

  12. [19]

    In: Eu- ropean conference on computer vision (ECCV) (2014)

    Dong, C., Loy, C.C., He, K., Tang, X.: Learning a deep convolutional network for image super-resolution. In: Eu- ropean conference on computer vision (ECCV) (2014)

    2014

  13. [20]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME) (2011)

    Dong, X., Wang, G., Pang, Y., Li, W., Wen, J., Meng, W., Lu, Y.: Fast efficient algorithm for enhancement of low lighting video. In: IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo (ICME) (2011)

    2011

  14. [21]

    International journal of computer vision (IJCV) 88(2), 303–338 (2010)

    Everingham, M., Van Gool, L., Williams, C.K., Winn, J., Zisserman, A.: The pascal visual object classes (voc) chal- lenge. International journal of computer vision (IJCV) 88(2), 303–338 (2010)

    2010

  15. [22]

    Signal Processing 129, 82–96 (2016)

    Fu, X., Zeng, D., Huang, Y., Liao, Y., Ding, X., Paisley, J.: A fusion-based enhancing method for weakly illumi- nated images. Signal Processing 129, 82–96 (2016)

    2016

  16. [23]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2016)

    Fu, X., Zeng, D., Huang, Y., Zhang, X.P., Ding, X.: A weighted variational model for simultaneous reflectance and illumination estimation. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2016)

    2016

  17. [24]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 36(4), 118 (2017)

    Gharbi, M., Chen, J., Barron, J.T., Hasinoff, S.W., Du- rand, F.: Deep bilateral learning for real-time image enhancement. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 36(4), 118 (2017)

    2017

  18. [25]

    In: Advances in neural in- formation processing systems (NIPS) (2014)

    Goodfellow, I., Pouget-Abadie, J., Mirza, M., Xu, B., Warde-Farley, D., Ozair, S., Courville, A., Bengio, Y.: Generative adversarial nets. In: Advances in neural in- formation processing systems (NIPS) (2014)

    2014

  19. [26]

    Grubinger, M., Clough, P., M¨ uller, H., Deselaers, T.: The iapr tc-12 benchmark: A new evaluation resource for vi- sual information systems. In: Int. Workshop OntoImage, vol. 5 (2006)

    2006

  20. [28]

    IEEE Transac- tions on Image Processing (TIP) 26(2), 982–993 (2017)

    Guo, X., Li, Y., Ling, H.: Lime: Low-light image enhance- ment via illumination map estimation. IEEE Transac- tions on Image Processing (TIP) 26(2), 982–993 (2017)

    2017

  21. [29]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2019)

    Hahner, M., Dai, D., Sakaridis, C., Zaech, J.N., Van Gool, L.: Semantic understanding of foggy scenes with purely synthetic data. In: IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2019)

    2019

  22. [30]

    In: Human vision and electronic imaging VIII, vol

    Hasler, D., Suesstrunk, S.E.: Measuring colorfulness in natural images. In: Human vision and electronic imaging VIII, vol. 5007, pp. 87–96 (2003)

    2003

  23. [31]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pp

    He, K., Gkioxari, G., Doll´ ar, P., Girshick, R.: Mask r-cnn. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pp. 2961–2969 (2017)

    2017

  24. [32]

    IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analy- sis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI)33(12), 2341–2353 (2011)

    He, K., Sun, J., Tang, X.: Single image haze removal using dark channel prior. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analy- sis and Machine Intelligence (TPAMI)33(12), 2341–2353 (2011)

    2011

  25. [33]

    In: IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR) (2016)

    He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., Sun, J.: Deep residual learning for image recognition. In: IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR) (2016)

    2016

  26. [34]

    In: European Conference on Com- puter Vision Workshop (ECCVW) (2018)

    Hui, Z., Wang, X., Deng, L., Gao, X.: Perception- preserving convolutional networks for image enhance- ment on smartphones. In: European Conference on Com- puter Vision Workshop (ECCVW) (2018)

    2018

  27. [35]

    IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics 53(4), 1752–1758 (2007)

    Ibrahim, H., Kong, N.S.P.: Brightness preserving dy- namic histogram equalization for image contrast en- hancement. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics 53(4), 1752–1758 (2007)

    2007

  28. [36]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2017)

    Ignatov, A., Kobyshev, N., Timofte, R., Vanhoey, K., Van Gool, L.: Dslr-quality photos on mobile devices with deep convolutional networks. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2017)

    2017

  29. [37]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) (2018)

    Ignatov, A., Kobyshev, N., Timofte, R., Vanhoey, K., Van Gool, L.: Wespe: weakly supervised photo enhancer for digital cameras. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) (2018)

    2018

  30. [38]

    ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 35(4), 110 (2016)

    Iizuka, S., Simo-Serra, E., Ishikawa, H.: Let there be color!: joint end-to-end learning of global and local image priors for automatic image colorization with simultane- ous classification. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 35(4), 110 (2016)

    2016

  31. [39]

    In: International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) (2015)

    Ioffe, S., Szegedy, C.: Batch normalization: accelerat- ing deep network training by reducing internal covariate shift. In: International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML) (2015)

    2015

  32. [40]

    IEEE Transactions on Image processing (TIP) 6(7), 965–976 (1997)

    Jobson, D.J., Rahman, Z.u., Woodell, G.A.: A multiscale retinex for bridging the gap between color images and the human observation of scenes. IEEE Transactions on Image processing (TIP) 6(7), 965–976 (1997)

    1997

  33. [41]

    IEEE Transactions on Image processing (TIP) 6(3), 451–462 (1997)

    Jobson, D.J., Rahman, Z.u., Woodell, G.A.: Properties and performance of a center/surround retinex. IEEE Transactions on Image processing (TIP) 6(3), 451–462 (1997)

    1997

  34. [42]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014)

    Kingma, D.P., Ba, J.: Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014)

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    Kupyn, O., Budzan, V., Mykhailych, M., Mishkin, D., Matas, J.: Deblurgan: Blind motion deblurring using conditional adversarial networks. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    Scientific American 237(6), 108–129 (1977)

    Land, E.H.: The retinex theory of color vision. Scientific American 237(6), 108–129 (1977)

    1977

  37. [45]

    IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR) (2017)

    Ledig, C., Theis, L., Husz´ ar, F., Caballero, J., Cun- ningham, A., Acosta, A., Aitken, A., Tejani, A., Totz, J., Wang, Z., et al.: Photo-realistic single image super- resolution using a generative adversarial network. IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognitio...

    2017

  38. [46]

    IEEE transactions on image processing (TIP) 22(12), 5372–5384 (2013)

    Lee, C., Lee, C., Kim, C.S.: Contrast enhancement based on layered difference representation of 2d histograms. IEEE transactions on image processing (TIP) 22(12), 5372–5384 (2013)

    2013

  39. [47]

    In: Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems (SITIS) (2013) Attention Guided Low-light Image Enhancement with a Large Scale Low-light Simulation Dataset 17

    Lee, C.H., Shih, J.L., Lien, C.C., Han, C.C.: Adap- tive multiscale retinex for image contrast enhancement. In: Signal-Image Technology & Internet-Based Systems (SITIS) (2013) Attention Guided Low-light Image Enhancement with a Large Scale Low-light Simulation Dataset 17

    2013

  40. [48]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 27(6), 2828–2841 (2018)

    Li, M., Liu, J., Yang, W., Sun, X., Guo, Z.: Structure- revealing low-light image enhancement via robust retinex model. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 27(6), 2828–2841 (2018)

    2018

  41. [49]

    In: European conference on computer vision (ECCV) (2014)

    Lin, T.Y., Maire, M., Belongie, S., Hays, J., Perona, P., Ramanan, D., Doll´ ar, P., Zitnick, C.L.: Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In: European conference on computer vision (ECCV) (2014)

    2014

  42. [50]

    Pattern Recognition (PR) 61, 650–662 (2017)

    Lore, K.G., Akintayo, A., Sarkar, S.: Llnet: A deep au- toencoder approach to natural low-light image enhance- ment. Pattern Recognition (PR) 61, 650–662 (2017)

    2017

  43. [51]

    British Machine Vi- sion Conference (BMVC) (2018)

    Lv, F., Lu, F., Wu, J., Lim, C.: Mbllen: Low-light im- age/video enhancement using cnns. British Machine Vi- sion Conference (BMVC) (2018)

    2018

  44. [52]

    In: AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (2020)

    Lv, F., Zheng, Y., Li, Y., Lu, F.: An integrated enhance- ment solution for 24-hour colorful imaging. In: AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (2020)

    2020

  45. [53]

    In: Computer Graphics and Applications, pp

    Mertens, T., Kautz, J., Van Reeth, F.: Exposure fusion. In: Computer Graphics and Applications, pp. 382–390 (2007)

    2007

  46. [54]

    In: Intelligent Sig- nal Processing and Communications Systems (ISPACS) (2013)

    Nakai, K., Hoshi, Y., Taguchi, A.: Color image con- trast enhacement method based on differential inten- sity/saturation gray-levels histograms. In: Intelligent Sig- nal Processing and Communications Systems (ISPACS) (2013)

    2013

  47. [55]

    16: Visual comparison of several low-level vision tasks

    [43] Fig. 16: Visual comparison of several low-level vision tasks. From top to bottom: dehazing, denoising, col- orization, defocus deblurring, super-resolution (×2) and motion deblurring

  48. [56]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2016)

    Pan, J., Sun, D., Pfister, H., Yang, M.H.: Blind image deblurring using dark channel prior. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2016)

    2016

  49. [57]

    In: Pattern Recognition (PR), vol

    Pech-Pacheco, J.L., Crist´ obal, G., Chamorro-Martinez, J., Fern´ andez-Valdivia, J.: Diatom autofocusing in brightfield microscopy: a comparative study. In: Pattern Recognition (PR), vol. 3, pp. 314–317 (2000)

    2000

  50. [58]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp

    Radenovic, F., Schonberger, J.L., Ji, D., Frahm, J.M., Chum, O., Matas, J.: From dusk till dawn: Modeling in the dark. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 5488–5496 (2016)

    2016

  51. [59]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.01687 (2017)

    Remez, T., Litany, O., Giryes, R., Bronstein, A.M.: Deep convolutional denoising of low-light images. arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.01687 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  52. [60]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) (2019)

    Ren, W., Liu, S., Ma, L., Xu, Q., Xu, X., Cao, X., Du, J., Yang, M.H.: Low-light image enhancement via a deep hybrid network. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) (2019)

    2019

  53. [61]

    In: IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS) (2018)

    Ren, X., Li, M., Cheng, W.H., Liu, J.: Joint enhancement and denoising method via sequential decomposition. In: IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS) (2018)

    2018

  54. [62]

    In: International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention (MICCAI) (2015)

    Ronneberger, O., Fischer, P., Brox, T.: U-net: Convolu- tional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In: International Conference on Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention (MICCAI) (2015)

    2015

  55. [63]

    In: International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2019)

    Sakaridis, C., Dai, D., , Van Gool, L.: Guided curriculum model adaptation and uncertainty-aware evaluation for semantic nighttime image segmentation. In: International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2019)

    2019

  56. [64]

    In: European Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2018)

    Sakaridis, C., Dai, D., Hecker, S., Van Gool, L.: Model adaptation with synthetic and real data for semantic dense foggy scene understanding. In: European Confer- ence on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2018)

    2018

  57. [65]

    International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) 126(9), 973–992 (2018)

    Sakaridis, C., Dai, D., Van Gool, L.: Semantic foggy scene understanding with synthetic data. International Journal of Computer Vision (IJCV) 126(9), 973–992 (2018)

    2018

  58. [66]

    Journal of mathematical imaging and vision 48(2), 279–294 (2014)

    Salmon, J., Harmany, Z., Deledalle, C.A., Willett, R.: Poisson noise reduction with non-local pca. Journal of mathematical imaging and vision 48(2), 279–294 (2014)

    2014

  59. [67]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp

    Sharma, V., Diba, A., Neven, D., Brown, M.S., Van Gool, L., Stiefelhagen, R.: Classification-driven dynamic image enhancement. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 4033–4041 (2018)

    2018

  60. [68]

    IEEE Transactions on image processing (TIP) 15(2), 430–444 (2006)

    Sheikh, H.R., Bovik, A.C.: Image information and visual quality. IEEE Transactions on image processing (TIP) 15(2), 430–444 (2006)

    2006

  61. [69]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.02488 (2017)

    Shen, L., Yue, Z., Feng, F., Chen, Q., Liu, S., Ma, J.: Msr-net: Low-light image enhancement using deep convo- lutional network. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.02488 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Computer Science (2014)

    Simonyan, K., Zisserman, A.: Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. Computer Science (2014)

    2014

  63. [71]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision Workshop (ECCVW), pp

    de Stoutz, E., Ignatov, A., Kobyshev, N., Timofte, R., Van Gool, L.: Fast perceptual image enhancement. In: European Conference on Computer Vision Workshop (ECCVW), pp. 260–275 (2018)

    2018

  64. [72]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Image Pro- cessing (ICIP) (2017)

    Tao, L., Zhu, C., Song, J., Lu, T., Jia, H., Xie, X.: Low- light image enhancement using cnn and bright channel prior. In: IEEE International Conference on Image Pro- cessing (ICIP) (2017)

    2017

  65. [73]

    In: Visual Communications and Image Pro- cessing (VCIP) (2017)

    Tao, L., Zhu, C., Xiang, G., Li, Y., Jia, H., Xie, X.: Llcnn: A convolutional neural network for low-light image en- hancement. In: Visual Communications and Image Pro- cessing (VCIP) (2017)

    2017

  66. [74]

    In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2019)

    Wang, R., Zhang, Q., Fu, C.W., Shen, X., Zheng, W.S., Jia, J.: Underexposed photo enhancement using deep illu- mination estimation. In: IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (2019)

    2019

  67. [75]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 22(9), 3538–3548 (2013)

    Wang, S., Zheng, J., Hu, H.M., Li, B.: Naturalness pre- served enhancement algorithm for non-uniform illumina- tion images. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing (TIP) 22(9), 3538–3548 (2013)

    2013

  68. [76]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition (FG) (2018)

    Wang, W., Wei, C., Yang, W., Liu, J.: Gladnet: Low-light enhancement network with global awareness. In: IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition (FG) (2018)

    2018

  69. [77]

    IEEE transactions on image processing (TIP) 13(4), 600–612 (2004)

    Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C., Sheikh, H.R., Simoncelli, E.P.: Image quality assessment: from error visibility to struc- tural similarity. IEEE transactions on image processing (TIP) 13(4), 600–612 (2004)

    2004

  70. [78]

    British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC) (2018)

    Wei, C., Wang, W., Yang, W., Liu, J.: Deep retinex de- composition for low-light enhancement. British Machine Vision Conference (BMVC) (2018)

    2018

  71. [79]

    European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2018)

    Xu, J., Zhang, L., Zhang, D.: A trilateral weighted sparse coding scheme for real-world image denoising. European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2018)

    2018

  72. [80]

    In: ACM Transactions on Graph- ics (TOG), vol

    Xu, L., Lu, C., Xu, Y., Jia, J.: Image smoothing via l 0 gradient minimization. In: ACM Transactions on Graph- ics (TOG), vol. 30, pp. 174–185 (2011)

    2011

  73. [81]

    Journal of Electronic Imaging 26(4), 043017 (2017)

    Yamashita, H., Sugimura, D., Hamamoto, T.: Low-light color image enhancement via iterative noise reduction us- ing rgb/nir sensor. Journal of Electronic Imaging 26(4), 043017 (2017)

    2017

  74. [82]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Pro- cessing (TIP) 22(2), 657–667 (2013)

    Yeganeh, H., Wang, Z.: Objective quality assessment of tone-mapped images. IEEE Transactions on Image Pro- cessing (TIP) 22(2), 657–667 (2013)

    2013

  75. [83]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.00591 (2017)

    Ying, Z., Li, G., Gao, W.: A bio-inspired multi-exposure fusion framework for low-light image enhancement. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.00591 (2017)

    2017 arXiv

  76. [84]

    In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2017)

    Ying, Z., Li, G., Ren, Y., Wang, R., Wang, W.: A new low-light image enhancement algorithm using camera re- sponse model. In: IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (2017)

    2017

  77. [85]

    IEEE Transactions on Image Pro- cessing (TIP) 26(7), 3142–3155 (2017) 18 Feifan Lv et al

    Zhang, K., Zuo, W., Chen, Y., Meng, D., Zhang, L.: Be- yond a gaussian denoiser: Residual learning of deep cnn for image denoising. IEEE Transactions on Image Pro- cessing (TIP) 26(7), 3142–3155 (2017) 18 Feifan Lv et al

    2017

  78. [86]

    In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2016)

    Zhang, R., Isola, P., Efros, A.A.: Colorful image col- orization. In: European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) (2016)

    2016

  79. [87]

    In: IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    Zhang, R., Isola, P., Efros, A.A., Shechtman, E., Wang, O.: The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In: IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR) (2018)

    2018

  80. [88]

    In: European conference on computer vision (ECCV) (2018)

    Zhang, Y., Li, K., Li, K., Wang, L., Zhong, B., Fu, Y.: Image super-resolution using very deep residual channel attention networks. In: European conference on computer vision (ECCV) (2018)

    2018

  81. [89]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.04161 (2019)

    Zhang, Y., Zhang, J., Guo, X.: Kindling the darkness: A practical low-light image enhancer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.04161 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.