Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Message from the ChairsWelcome to the 15th IEEE International Conference on Computational Photography (ICCP 2023), taking place at Monona Terrace in Madison, WI!This year's three-day conference features 24 accepted papers, 3 keynote talks, 8 invited talks, and 66 posters and/or demos.Paper Submission and Reviewing.A total of 52 complete paper submissions were received through Microsoft's Conference Management Toolkit.To ensure a rigorous and comprehensive selection process, we invited 75 experts to join the program committee.Our aim was to create a diverse committee comprising both highly-experienced senior researchers and highly-accomplished junior researchers.Their expertise spans across various domains, including computational photography, computational imaging, computer vision, computer graphics, signal processing, and optics.Conflicts were managed through automated tools like the Toronto Paper Matching System and the DBLP database, along with manual oversight by the program chairs themselves.The program chairs abstained from submitting papers to ensure impartiality.In cases where a program chair had a conflict of interest with a specific paper, they were completely removed from all aspects of the reviewing process concerning that particular paper.Following the submission deadline, the program committee members were given the opportunity to express their interest in reviewing specific papers, excluding those where there was a conflict of interest.The program chairs then carefully assigned papers to reviewers while ensuring each paper had a minimum of 3 reviewers.For each paper, the program chairs designated one of the assigned reviewers as the meta-reviewer.Almost all program committee members had no more than one meta-reviewer assignment, with only two exceptions.The reviewers were allotted a period of 4 weeks to complete their evaluations.Following the review phase, authors were given 1 week to provide rebuttals to the reviews.A week-long discussion period followed, during which the meta-reviewers thoroughly analyzed the assigned papers and formulated their recommendations.The recommendations consisted of two crucial components.Firstly, the paper outcome was indicated as either rejected, conditionally accepted to the ICCP 2023 proceedings, or conditionally accepted to the Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence special issue on computational photography (TPAMI special issue).Secondly, for conditionally-accepted papers, specific revisions and required changes were outlined that the authors needed to implement before the paper could be officially accepted.This process ensured a rigorous and fair evaluation of all submissions.Upon reviewing the recommendations, the program chairs made the decision to conditionally accept 24 papers, resulting in a 46% acceptance rate.Out of these, 6 papers were conditionally accepted for inclusion in the TPAMI special issue, accounting for 12% of the accepted papers.The remaining conditionally accepted papers were approved for inclusion in the ICCP 2023 proceedings.During the final phase of the paper reviewing process, authors were granted a one-month window to revise their papers based on the feedback received during the initial review.At the end of this period, authors submitted their revised manuscripts, along with cover letters explaining the changes made, and annotated manuscripts highlighting the implemented revisions.All the submitted revised manuscripts underwent a second round of reviewing, conducted by both the program chairs and meta-reviewers.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,021 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,009 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,264 | 0,189 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».