DataVXJournal of Nondestructive EvaluationPaper
journal article·2023-12

Detail-Preserving Multi-exposure Fusion for DR Images of Turbine Blades with Local Contrast Analysis and Exposure Intensity

Lei Zhang, Bing Li, Lei Chen, Xiang Wei, Zhongyu Shang

Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation· Volume 42· Issue 4
Publisher page
Bibliographic record

Abstract

No abstract is available for this record. The assistant can identify its topic from the title, but cannot infer the study’s results.

Source: Not provided · Quality: missing

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced Image Fusion Techniques · Image Enhancement Techniques · Advanced Image Processing Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (29)

Show source-provided references
1. Chen, L., Li, B., Zhang, L., et al.: 3D positioning of defects for gas turbine blades based on digital radiographic projective imaging. NDT E Int. 133, 102751 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2022.10275110.1016/j.ndteint.2022.102751 ↗
2. Zhang, L., Li, B., Chen, L., et al.: Enhancement of digital radiographic images for gas turbine blades based on simple scattering model. J. Nondestr. Eval. 42(2), 33 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-023-00942-010.1007/s10921-023-00942-0 ↗
3. Zhang, L., Li, B., Chen, L., et al.: Classification of internal defects of gas turbine blades based on the discrimination of linear attenuation coefficients. Insight Non-Destruct. Test. Cond. Monitor. 65(6), 335–340 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1784/insi.2023.65.6.33510.1784/insi.2023.65.6.335 ↗
4. ASNT.: Nondestructive testing handbook. In: Radiographic Testing, vol. 3, 4th edn. American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, OH (2019)
5. Qi, Y., Wang, L.: Multi-voltage digital radiography images fusion based on well-exposedness. Optik Int. J. Light Electron Optics 126(19), 1889–1893 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2015.05.00510.1016/j.ijleo.2015.05.005 ↗
6. Mengqian, Y.U., Wei, W.U., Guanhua, W.U., et al.: Optimization of DR testing process parameters for turbine blades in aero engines. J. Aerosp. Power 1(23), 1–9 (2022). https://doi.org/10.13224/j.cnki.jasp.2021073110.13224/j.cnki.jasp.20210731 ↗
7. Bing, L., Zhangbing, L., Lei, C.: Method for determining partition and exposure parameters of gas turbine blades by digital radiography. J. Xi’an Jiaotong Univ. 53, 31–39 (2019). https://doi.org/10.7652/xjtuxb20191000510.7652/xjtuxb201910005 ↗
8. Shang, Z., Li, B., Chen, L., et al.: Adaptive segmentation method in radiographic testing for turbine blades based on spatial entropy. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 93(11), 113312 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.010384410.1063/5.0103844 ↗
9. Zhao, R., Liu, Y., Zhao, Z., et al.: Multi-energy X-ray images fusion method based on fuzzy entropy and sparse representation for complex castings. NDT E Int. 124, 102535 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2021.10253510.1016/j.ndteint.2021.102535 ↗
10. Xu, F., Liu, J., Song, Y., et al.: Multi-exposure image fusion techniques: a comprehensive review. Remote Sens. 14(3), 771 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs1403077110.3390/rs14030771 ↗
11. Li, H., Ma, K., Yong, H., et al.: Fast multi-scale structural patch decomposition for multi-exposure image fusion. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 29, 5805–5816 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2020.298713310.1109/TIP.2020.2987133 ↗
12. Bruce, N.D.B.: ExpoBlend: information preserving exposure blending based on normalized log-domain entropy: graphics interface. Comput. Graph. 39, 12–23 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2013.10.00110.1016/j.cag.2013.10.001 ↗
13. Liu, S., Zhang, Y.: Detail-preserving under exposed image enhancement via optimal weighted multi-exposure fusion. IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. 65(3), 303–311 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/TCE.2019.289364410.1109/TCE.2019.2893644 ↗
14. Krämer, P., Weckenmann, A.: Multi-energy image stack fusion in computed tomography. Meas. Sci. Technol. 21(4), 045105 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-0233/21/4/04510510.1088/0957-0233/21/4/045105 ↗
15. Qi, Y., Yang, Z., Kang, L.: Multi-exposure x-ray image fusion quality evaluation based on CSF and gradient amplitude similarity. J. Xray Sci. Technol. 29(4), 697–709 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3233/XST-21087110.3233/XST-210871 ↗
16. Ulucan, O., Karakaya, D., Turkan, M.: Multi-exposure image fusion based on linear embeddings and watershed masking. Signal Process. 178, 107791 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sigpro.2020.10779110.1016/j.sigpro.2020.107791 ↗
17. Bay, H., et al.: Speeded-up robust features (SURF). Comput. Vision Image Underst 110(3), 346–359 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cviu.2007.09.01410.1016/j.cviu.2007.09.014 ↗
18. Rublee, E., et al.: ORB: An efficient alternative to SIFT or SURF. In: International conference on computer vision. IEEE (2011). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCV.2011.612654410.1109/ICCV.2011.6126544 ↗
19. Liu, Y., Liu, S., Wang, Z.: Multi-focus image fusion with dense SIFT. Inf. Fusion 23, 139–155 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2014.05.00410.1016/j.inffus.2014.05.004 ↗
20. Lowe, D.G.: Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int. J. Comput. Vision 60, 91–110 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:VISI.0000029664.99615.9410.1023/B:VISI.0000029664.99615.94 ↗
21. Liu, Y., Wang, Z.: Dense SIFT for ghost-free multi-exposure fusion. J. Vis. Commun. Image Represent. 31, 208–224 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvcir.2015.06.02110.1016/j.jvcir.2015.06.021 ↗
22. Lee, S., Park, J.S., Cho, N.I.: A multi-exposure image fusion based on the adaptive weights reflecting the relative pixel intensity and global gradient. In: 2018 25th IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), pp. 1737–1741. IEEE (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP.2018.845115310.1109/ICIP.2018.8451153 ↗
23. He, K., Sun, J., Tang, X.: Guided image filtering. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 35(6), 1397–1409 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2012.21310.1109/TPAMI.2012.213 ↗
24. Huang, L., et al.: Multi-exposure image fusion based on feature evaluation with adaptive factor. IET Image Proc. 15(13), 3211–3220 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1049/ipr2.1231710.1049/ipr2.12317 ↗
25. Mertens, T., Kautz, J., Van Reeth, F.: Exposure fusion: a simple and practical alternative to high dynamic range photography. Comput. Graph. Forum 28(1), 161–171 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8659.2008.01171.x10.1111/j.1467-8659.2008.01171.x ↗
26. Karakaya, D., Ulucan, O., Turkan, M.: PAS-MEF Multi-exposure image fusion based on principal component analysis, adaptive well-exposedness and saliency map. In: ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE international conference on acoustics, speech and signal processing ICASSP. IEEE (2022). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP43922.2022.974677910.1109/ICASSP43922.2022.9746779 ↗
27. Wang, Q., et al.: Detail-enhanced multi-scale exposure fusion in YUV color space. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. Video Technol. 30(8), 2418–2429 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSVT.2019.291931010.1109/TCSVT.2019.2919310 ↗
28. Ma, K., et al.: Multi-exposure image fusion by optimizing a structural similarity index. IEEE Trans. Comput. Imaging 4(1), 60–72 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1109/TCI.2017.278613810.1109/TCI.2017.2786138 ↗
29. Ma, K., Zeng, K., Wang, Z.: Perceptual quality assessment for multi-exposure image fusion. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 24(11), 3345–3356 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2015.244292010.1109/TIP.2015.2442920 ↗