Evaluation of tone mapping operators using a High Dynamic Range display
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tone mapping operators are designed to reproduce visibility and the overall impression of brightness, contrast and color of the real world onto limited dynamic range displays and printers. Although many tone mapping operators have been published in recent years, no thorough psychophysical experiments have yet been undertaken to compare such operators against the real scenes they are purporting to depict. In this paper, we present the results of a series of psychophysical experiments to validate six frequently used tone mapping operators against linearly mapped High Dynamic Range (HDR) scenes displayed on a novel HDR device. Individual operators address the tone mapping issue using a variety of approaches and the goals of these techniques are often quite different from one another. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was not simply to determine which is the "best" algorithm, but more generally to propose an experimental methodology to validate such operators and to determine the participants' impressions of the images produced compared to what is visible on a high contrast ratio display.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it