| 8 | | Based on these profiles, it's clear that the initial image has some gradient included, the continuity correction does a reasonable job of aligning these gradients into a large slope, and then the background correction removes this large slope, with a few DN peak-to-peak residual gradient remaining. I checked that this gradient was not due entirely to the increased row-to-row variations evident on the high edge of the chip, and that does not appear to be the case. The best description is that there is an underlying gradient, and as the gradient increases, the row-to-row variations produce higher spikes that trigger the false detections. |
| | 8 | Based on these profiles, it's clear that the initial image has some gradient included, the continuity correction does a reasonable job of aligning these gradients into a large slope, and then the background correction removes this large slope, with a few DN peak-to-peak residual gradient remaining. I checked that this gradient was not due entirely to the increased row-to-row variations evident on the high edge of the chip, and that does not appear to be the case. The best description is that there is an underlying gradient, and as the gradient increases, the row-to-row variations produce higher spikes that trigger the false detections. It is interesting to note that the fifth cell in this profile (with a small slope and low residual gradient) matches a cell with few false detections. |
