MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073305885 · doi:10.1145/2766897

Homogeneous codes for energy-efficient illumination and imaging

2015· article· en· W2073305885 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew O’Toole, Supreeth Achar, Srinivasa G. Narasimhan, Kiriakos N. Kutulakos

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Imaging Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersArmy Research LaboratoryNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEpipolar geometryProjectorComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceCoding (social sciences)Structured lightShutterLaserEfficient energy useComputer graphics (images)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Programmable coding of light between a source and a sensor has led to several important results in computational illumination, imaging and display. Little is known, however, about how to utilize energy most effectively, especially for applications in live imaging. In this paper, we derive a novel framework to maximize energy efficiency by "homogeneous matrix factorization" that respects the physical constraints of many coding mechanisms (DMDs/LCDs, lasers, etc. ). We demonstrate energy-efficient imaging using two prototypes based on DMD and laser illumination. For our DMD-based prototype, we use fast local optimization to derive codes that yield brighter images with fewer artifacts in many transport probing tasks. Our second prototype uses a novel combination of a low-power laser projector and a rolling shutter camera. We use this prototype to demonstrate never-seen-before capabilities such as (1) capturing live structured-light video of very bright scenes---even a light bulb that has been turned on; (2) capturing epipolar-only and indirect-only live video with optimal energy efficiency; (3) using a low-power projector to reconstruct 3D objects in challenging conditions such as strong indirect light, strong ambient light, and smoke; and (4) recording live video from a projector's---rather than the camera's---point of view.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations111
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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