Underwater Image Enhancement and Object Detection: Are Poor Object Detection Results On Enhanced Images Due to Missing Human Labels?

Underwater image enhancement has led to mixed performance when used in conjunction with object detectors. Some works report an improvement in object detection performance when used in conjunction with image enhancement, while other works show that enhancement degrades detection performance. In this work, we identify and attempt to quantify a confounding factor to reconcile these contradictory results: we show that poor image quality leads to low quality labels, which confounds performance assessments done with respect to these noisy labels. Application of image enhancement during the human labeling procedure recovers previously missed labels for less-biased performance assessment. We find that on the test set of the Rethinking general Underwater Object Detection (RUOD) dataset, re-annotation of enhanced images shows a mean increase of 9 labels per image, which leads to a 5 percentage point increase in precision during object detection with a YOLO-NAS model.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-02-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1109/wacvw65960.2025.00167
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Image Enhancement Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.55
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Underwater Image Enhancement and Object Detection: Are Poor Object Detection Results On Enhanced Images Due to Missing Human Labels?

Angus Galloway, Timothy C. Havens, Ali Ismail Awad, Ashraf Saleem et al.
2 citations
Image Enhancement Techniques
2.55
article

Underwater Image Enhancement and Object Detection: Are Poor Object Detection Results On Enhanced Images Due to Missing Human Labels?

Angus Galloway, Timothy C. Havens, Ali Ismail Awad, Ashraf Saleem, Anthony J Geglio, Evan Lucas, Sidike Paheding, Shadi Moradi
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Underwater image enhancement has led to mixed performance when used in conjunction with object detectors. Some works report an improvement in object detection performance when used in conjunction with image enhancement, while other works show that enhancement degrades detection performance. In this work, we identify and attempt to quantify a confounding factor to reconcile these contradictory results: we show that poor image quality leads to low quality labels, which confounds performance assessments done with respect to these noisy labels. Application of image enhancement during the human labeling procedure recovers previously missed labels for less-biased performance assessment. We find that on the test set of the Rethinking general Underwater Object Detection (RUOD) dataset, re-annotation of enhanced images shows a mean increase of 9 labels per image, which leads to a 5 percentage point increase in precision during object detection with a YOLO-NAS model.

Michigan Technological University (US), Fairfield University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Image Enhancement Techniques
2.55
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.