MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034866701 · doi:10.1117/12.542618

Validation of synthetic imagery for night vision devices

2004· article· en· W2034866701 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Thomas, Robert S. Allison, Sion Jennings, Kevin Y. Yip, Eugene Savchenko, Isaac Tsang, Todd Macuda, Richard Hornsey

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionOscilloscopeScintillationNight visionArtificial intelligenceParametric statisticsComputer graphics (images)MathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Night vision devices are important tools that extend the operational capability of military and civilian flight operations. Although these devices enhance some aspects of night vision, they distort or degrade other aspects. Scintillation of the NVG signal at low light levels is one of the parameters that may affect pilot performance. We have developed a parametric model of NVG image scintillation. Measurements were taken of the output of a representative NVG at low light levels to validate the model and refine the values of the embedded parameters. A simple test environment was created using a photomultiplier and an oscilloscope. The model was used to create sequences of simulated NVG imagery that were characterized numerically and compared with measured NVG signals. The sequences of imagery are intended for use in laboratory experiments on depth and motion-in-depth perception.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207