MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096185181 · doi:10.1109/jsen.2010.2089447

CMOS Active-Pixel Sensor With In-Situ Memory for Ultrahigh-Speed Imaging

2010· article· en· W2096185181 on OpenAlexaff
Munir M. El‐Desouki, Ognian Marinov, M. Jamal Deen, Qiyin Fang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Sensors Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCCD and CMOS Imaging Sensors
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage sensorFrame rateComputer sciencePixelComputer hardwareCMOSCMOS sensorFrame (networking)ChipData acquisitionElectronic engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State-of-the-art image sensor arrays have not been able to operate at frame rates that exceed tens to hundreds of thousands of frames per second. The main bottle neck preventing imaging at higher frame rates is the time required to access the array, convert the image data from analog to digital, and transmit the data off the image sensor chip. The later is considered the most significant source of delay, mainly due to the limited number of input and output ports available on the chip. This work allows for a significant increase in image capture rate by separating the image acquisition phase from the conversion and readout phase. This was done by capturing eight frames at a high capture rate and temporarily storing the multiple frames into analog memory units that are incorporated inside the pixel. The design was implemented in a deep-submicron CMOS 130 nm technology that allows for high-speed operation. This paper discusses the tradeoffs of using in-situ frame storage and gives some recommendations.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Sensors JournalSame topicCCD and CMOS Imaging SensorsFrench-language works237,207