MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054790610 · doi:10.1364/oe.22.009887

Adaptive fringe-pattern projection for image saturation avoidance in 3D surface-shape measurement

2014· article· en· W2054790610 on OpenAlexafffund
Dong Li, Jonathan Kofman

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStructured-light 3D scannerOpticsProjection (relational algebra)Saturation (graph theory)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceMaterials sciencePhysicsMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In fringe-projection 3D surface-shape measurement, image saturation results in incorrect intensities in captured images of fringe patterns, leading to phase and measurement errors. An adaptive fringe-pattern projection (AFPP) method was developed to adapt the maximum input gray level in projected fringe patterns to the local reflectivity of an object surface being measured. The AFPP method demonstrated improved 3D measurement accuracy by avoiding image saturation in highly-reflective surface regions while maintaining high intensity modulation across the entire surface. The AFPP method can avoid image saturation and handle varying surface reflectivity, using only two prior rounds of fringe-pattern projection and image capture to generate the adapted fringe patterns.

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)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations145
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207