The captured sparkle alpha peaks ~0.51, but some real Gemini sparkles are
rendered more opaque. The fixed-alpha reverse blend then UNDER-subtracts and
leaves a bright residual the detector still fires on. A visible-removal audit
through the registry path on the spaces corpus showed this as a meaningful
fraction of marks -- all under-removals, not a background-brightness class
(failures and successes had the same input confidence and background luma; the
discriminator was the removal delta itself).
remove_watermark now estimates a per-image alpha gain (_estimate_alpha_gain:
effective sparkle opacity at the bright core vs the local background ring,
a_eff/a_cap, clamped [1.0, 1.94]) and scales the alpha to match before the
over-sub/blend branch. A 1.05 deadband keeps a sparkle that already matches the
capture byte-identical to the pre-fix output, so the fix is purely additive
(0 regressions on the audit set; failures dropped substantially). The over-sub
guard still runs on the scaled alpha as the safety net for an over-shoot.
- _estimate_alpha_gain + _ALPHA_GAIN_MAX/_DEADBAND/_CORE_FRAC in gemini_engine.
- TestUnderSubtractionGain asserts on footprint pixels, NOT the detector (its
NCC is degenerate on a flat synthetic bg; the real corpus removal drops the
detector ~0.80 -> ~0.27).
- scripts/visible_removal_audit.py: the detect -> remove -> re-detect audit tool
that found and validated this (operates on gitignored data/spaces only).
- CLAUDE.md + README: document the under-subtraction gain.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Victor Kuznetsov