MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124986904 · doi:10.1109/tpami.2007.39

Polarization Multiplexing and Demultiplexing for Appearance-Based Modeling

2007· article· en· W2124986904 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Polarization and Ellipsometry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiplexingComputer sciencePolarization (electrochemistry)Artificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polarization has been used in numerous prior studies for separating diffuse and specular reflectance components, but in this work we show that it also can be used to separate surface reflectance contributions from individual light sources. Our approach is called polarization multiplexing and it has a significant impact in appearance modeling where the image as a function of illumination direction is needed. Multiple unknown light sources can illuminate the scene simultaneously, and the individual contributions to the overall surface reflectance are estimated. Polarization multiplexing relies on the relationship between the light source direction and the intensity modulation. Inverting this transformation enables the individual intensity contributions to be estimated. In addition to polarization multiplexing, we show that phase histograms from the intensity modulations can be used to estimate scene properties including the number of light sources.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.240 · 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