MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1894463949 · doi:10.1145/2701416

Hyperspectral Modeling of Skin Appearance

2015· article· en· W1894463949 on OpenAlexaff
Tenn F. Chen, Gladimir V. G. Baranoski, Bradley W. Kimmel, Erik Miranda

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingRendering (computer graphics)Human skinWavelengthUltravioletComputer scienceVisible spectrumOpticsRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPhysicsGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exploration of the hyperspectral domain offers a host of new research and application possibilities involving material appearance modeling. In this article, we address these prospects with respect to human skin, one of the most ubiquitous materials portrayed in synthetic imaging. We present the first hyperspectral model designed for the predictive rendering of skin appearance attributes in the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared domains. The proposed model incorporates the intrinsic bio-optical properties of human skin affecting light transport in these spectral regions, including the particle nature and distribution patterns of the main light attenuation agents found within the cutaneous tissues. Accordingly, it accounts for phenomena that significantly affect skin spectral signatures, both within and outside the visible domain, such as detour and sieve effects, that are overlooked by existing skin appearance models. Using a first-principles approach, the proposed model computes the surface and subsurface scattering components of skin reflectance taking into account not only the wavelength and the illumination geometry, but also the positional dependence of the reflected light. Hence, the spectral and spatial distributions of light interacting with human skin can be comprehensively represented in terms of hyperspectral reflectance and BSSRDF, respectively.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.049
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207