Comparametric HDR (High Dynamic Range) imaging for digital eye glass, wearable cameras, and sousveillance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wearable computing can be used to both extend the range of human perception, and to share sensory experiences with others. For this objective to be made practical, engineering considerations such as form factor, computational power, and power consumption are critical concerns. In this work, we consider the design of a low-power visual seeing aid, and how to implement computationally-intensive computational photography algorithms in a small form factor with low power consumption. We present realtime an FPGA-based HDR (High Dynamic Range) video processing and filtering by integrating tonal and spatial information obtained from multiple different exposures of the same subject matter. In this embodiment the system captures, in rapid succession, sets of three exposures, “dark”, “medium”, and “light”, over and over again, e.g. “dark”, “medium”, “light”, “dark”, “medium”, “light”, and so on, at 60 frames per second. These exposures are used to determine an estimate of the photoquantity every 1/60th of a second (each time a frame comes in, an estimate goes out). This allows us to build a seeing aid that helps people see better in high contrast scenes, for example, while welding, or in outdoor scenes, or scenes where a bright light is shining directly into the eyes of the wearer. Our system is suitable for being built into eyeglasses or small camera-based, lifeglogging, or gesture-sensing pendants, and other miniature wearable devices, with low-power and compact circuits that can be easily mounted on the body.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".