MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038622494 · doi:10.1117/12.795456

3D imaging from theory to practice: the Mona Lisa story

2008· article· en· W2038622494 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

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaintingComputer science3d modelComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligenceMeasure (data warehouse)VarnishComputer visionOpticsEngineering drawingVisual artsArtEngineeringMaterials sciencePhysicsNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The warped poplar panel and the technique developed by Leonardo to paint the Mona Lisa present a unique research and engineering challenge for the design of a complete optical 3D imaging system. This paper discusses the solution developed to precisely measure in 3D the world's most famous painting despite its highly contrasted paint surface and reflective varnish. The discussion focuses on the opto-mechanical design and the complete portable 3D imaging system used for this unique occasion. The challenges associated with obtaining 3D color images at a resolution of 0.05 mm and a depth precision of 0.01 mm are illustrated by exploring the virtual 3D model of the Mona Lisa.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.664
Threshold uncertainty score0.926

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.229 · 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