MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002428115 · doi:10.1109/lsp.2010.2090869

A Testbed and Methodology for Comparing Live Video Frame Rate Control Methods

2010· article· en· W2002428115 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Signal Processing Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Coding and Compression Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTestbedComputer scienceFrame (networking)Real-time computingFrame rateControl (management)Mobile telephonySimple (philosophy)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer networkMobile radio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most existing methods for video frame rate control were developed for prerecorded video. With the proliferation of mobile audiovisual communication devices, it is becoming important to develop frame rate control methods for live (i.e., not prerecorded) video as well. In this letter, we present a testbed and the corresponding methodology suitable for comparing such methods. We illustrate the methodology and the use of the testbed through comparison of an existing state-of-the-art frame rate control method against a simple new control method developed specifically for live video.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.269 · 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