MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076246983 · doi:10.1145/1409060.1409085

Time-resolved 3d capture of non-stationary gas flows

2008· article· en· W2076246983 on OpenAlexaff
Bradley Atcheson, Ivo Ihrke, Wolfgang Heidrich, Art Tevs, Derek Bradley, Marcus Magnor, Hans‐Peter Seidel

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSchlierenComputer scienceGridShutterRay tracing (physics)Computer graphics (images)GraphicsTomographyComputer graphicsFlow (mathematics)Computational scienceComputer visionAlgorithmOpticsPhysicsGeometryMechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluid simulation is one of the most active research areas in computer graphics. However, it remains difficult to obtain measurements of real fluid flows for validation of the simulated data. In this paper, we take a step in the direction of capturing flow data for such purposes. Specifically, we present the first time-resolved Schlieren tomography system for capturing full 3D, non-stationary gas flows on a dense volumetric grid. Schlieren tomography uses 2D ray deflection measurements to reconstruct a time-varying grid of 3D refractive index values, which directly correspond to physical properties of the flow. We derive a new solution for this reconstruction problem that lends itself to efficient algorithms that robustly work with relatively small numbers of cameras. Our physical system is easy to set up, and consists of an array of relatively low cost rolling-shutter camcorders that are synchronized with a new approach. We demonstrate our method with real measurements, and analyze precision with synthetic data for which ground truth information is available.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations195
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207