MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981626253 · doi:10.1109/icce.2014.6776065

Effect of high frame rates on 3D video quality of experience

2014· preprint· en· W1981626253 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Banitalebi-Dehkordi, Mahsa T. Pourazad, Panos Nasiopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrame (networking)Quality (philosophy)Frame rateComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPsychologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study the effect of 3D videos with increased frame rates on the viewers' quality of experience. We performed a series of subjective tests to seek the subjects' preferences among videos of the same scene at four different frame rates: 24, 30, 48, and 60 frames per second (fps). Results revealed that subjects clearly prefer higher frame rates. In particular, Mean Opinion Score (MOS) values associated with the 60 fps 3D videos were 55% greater than MOS values of the 24 fps 3D videos.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207