MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058468730 · doi:10.1109/icecs.2011.6122293

Customized embedded processor design for global photographic tone mapping

2011· article· en· W2058468730 on OpenAlexaff
Shervin Vakili, Diana C. Gil, J. M. Pierre Langlois, Yvon Savaria, Guy Bois

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTone mappingOverhead (engineering)LogarithmGraphicsLuminanceReduced instruction set computingHigh dynamic rangeComputer hardwareRange (aeronautics)Flexibility (engineering)Embedded systemInstruction setDynamic rangeParallel computingComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionOperating systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tone-mapping (TM) aims to adapt high dynamic range images to conventional display devices. TM algorithms are usually implemented on general purpose processors and graphics processing units. Such platforms may not meet performance, area, power and flexibility constraints imposed by the embedded system domain. This paper presents the design and implementation of a customized processor for a global TM algorithm. Using an architecture description language, three custom instructions to calculate luminance, logarithm and maximum luminance were added to a 32-bit RISC-based processor. The logarithm was computed using an improved Mitchell approximation. Experimental results demonstrate a 169% performance improvement when adding all three instructions, with a hardware overhead of only 22%.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0040.001

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207