MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062090038 · doi:10.1145/2461912.2461945

Low-budget transient imaging using photonic mixer devices

2013· article· en· W2062090038 on OpenAlexaff
Felix Heide, Matthias B. Hullin, James Gregson, Wolfgang Heidrich

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransient (computer programming)Computer scienceInstrumentation (computer programming)Process (computing)Computer visionArtificial intelligencePhotonicsOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transient imaging is an exciting a new imaging modality that can be used to understand light propagation in complex environments, and to capture and analyze scene properties such as the shape of hidden objects or the reflectance properties of surfaces. Unfortunately, research in transient imaging has so far been hindered by the high cost of the required instrumentation, as well as the fragility and difficulty to operate and calibrate devices such as femtosecond lasers and streak cameras. In this paper, we explore the use of photonic mixer devices (PMD), commonly used in inexpensive time-of-flight cameras, as alternative instrumentation for transient imaging. We obtain a sequence of differently modulated images with a PMD sensor, impose a model for local light/object interaction, and use an optimization procedure to infer transient images given the measurements and model. The resulting method produces transient images at a cost several orders of magnitude below existing methods, while simultaneously simplifying and speeding up the capture process.

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)0.001
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations193
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207