MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2007224060 · doi:10.1109/icip.2014.7025112

Towards a new image quality metric for evaluating the effects of tiled displays

2014· article· en· W2007224060 on OpenAlexaff
Steven McFadden, Paul A. S. Ward

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetric (unit)Computer scienceImage qualityGridQuality (philosophy)Image (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tiled displays provide an effective means of displaying very large images but these displays suffer from unique grid-type distortions. These are caused by the gaps between each sub-display's active area and have been largely ignored in the image quality assessment (IQA) literature. Recent work has suggested that current IQA metrics perform poorly when evaluating the effects of grid distortions and demonstrated the need for a new metric. This paper introduces this new IQA metric and tests it against a significantly expanded IQA database for grid-distorted images. We describe this new metric in detail and show how it provides a clear improvement over existing IQA quality metrics in evaluation of tiled image quality.

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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.365 · 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.

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

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207