MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002339548 · doi:10.1002/ppsc.200900069

Evaluation of Digital Image Discretization Error in Droplet Shape Measurement Using Simulation

2009· article· en· W2002339548 on OpenAlexaff
Sina Ghaemi, David S. Nobes

Bibliographic record

VenueParticle & Particle Systems Characterization · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrowetting and Microfluidic Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationShape factorPixelSensitivity (control systems)Image (mathematics)MathematicsDigital imageGeometric shapeShape parameterApproximation errorArtificial intelligenceComputer visionImage processingComputer scienceGeometryAlgorithmMathematical analysisStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Droplet shape measurement using image based techniques can be conducted using shape parameters which consist of a number of geometric features of a droplet image. The accuracy of calculating these shape parameters and their capability in revealing shape deviation is considerably affected by the discretization of the image with a camera CCD. In this paper, a simulation of digital images is conducted to investigate the error caused by image discretization. The effect of this error on calculating area, perimeter, and also a selected number of shape parameters are investigated. Digital images of circular and elliptical discs at different image/pixel size ratio and locations relative to the pixel grid have been generated to simulate the projected view. Results show that the shape parameters demonstrate different levels of sensitivity to the desirable factor of shape deviation and the undesirable factor of image discretization. A “clearance factor” has been suggested and used to rank the shape parameters based on their compensation between sensitivity to shape deviation and image discretization.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations9
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueParticle & Particle Systems CharacterizationSame topicElectrowetting and Microfluidic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207