Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Products

aiqbench analysis

This research demonstrates that while commercial generative models can handle shadow removal, they often hallucinate physical inconsistencies; the authors mitigate this by integrating an agentic pipeline grounded in illumination physics to filter out physically implausible edits. The study concludes that classic low-level vision priors remain essential for constraining generation tasks where data is scarce or physical laws are complex.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Domain-Grounded Candidate Selection for Agentic Image Editing: A Shadow Removal Case

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2608.06075v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Commercial vision-language models are reshaping computer vision, with visual priors broad enough to rival task-specific systems. This raises a natural question: do they reduce the need for classic, physics-informed low-level vision? We study this through shadow removal, a problem shaped by scene geometry, illumination, materials, and occluders, where paired shadow and shadow-free data are hard to collect at scale. We find that a commercial generative editor, used directly, can produce clean shadow-free edits that preserve surface texture and local appearance. However, this comes with a new failure mode: the same editor can regenerate scene content, hallucinate objects, or misread a shadow as material or geometry, producing plausible but physically wrong edits. We address this with an agentic candidate-selection pipeline: the editor generates a guided probe, an evaluator screens for major failures, retries when needed, samples multiple candidates, filters them, and selects a final result balancing shadow removal against scene preservation. Grounding this process in shadow-formation physics makes it more reliable: prompting the generator and evaluator to treat shadows as illumination effects caused by light occlusion, not material or object structure, measurably improves quality and consistency. On the ShadowRemovalRefine benchmark, our physics-oriented pipeline achieves a CDD of 0.0075, reducing CDD by at least 47% over the strongest prior method. These results suggest that commercial vision-language models do not replace classic low-level vision priors; instead, such priors remain useful for constraining and steering physically underconstrained generation.

Abstract:Commercial vision-language models are reshaping computer vision, with visual priors broad enough to rival task-specific systems. This raises a natural question: do they reduce the need for classic, physics-informed low-level vision? We study this through shadow removal, a problem shaped by scene geometry, illumination, materials, and occluders, where paired shadow and shadow-free data are hard to collect at scale. We find that a commercial generative editor, used directly, can produce clean shadow-free edits that preserve surface texture and local appearance. However, this comes with a new failure mode: the same editor can regenerate scene content, hallucinate objects, or misread a shadow as material or geometry, producing plausible but physically wrong edits. We address this with an agentic candidate-selection pipeline: the editor generates a guided probe, an evaluator screens for major failures, retries when needed, samples multiple candidates, filters them, and selects a final result balancing shadow removal against scene preservation. Grounding this process in shadow-formation physics makes it more reliable: prompting the generator and evaluator to treat shadows as illumination effects caused by light occlusion, not material or object structure, measurably improves quality and consistency. On the ShadowRemovalRefine benchmark, our physics-oriented pipeline achieves a CDD of 0.0075, reducing CDD by at least 47% over the strongest prior method. These results suggest that commercial vision-language models do not replace classic low-level vision priors; instead, such priors remain useful for constraining and steering physically underconstrained generation.

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2608.06075 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2608.06075v1 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.06075 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 334 words

Related coverage