Bibliographic record
Abstract
When we ask the fundamental question "What does a camera measure?", we arrive at the concept of quantimetric imaging, which uses a new quantimetric unit, q, characteristic of a particular camera (e.g. each kind of camera defines its own quantimetric unit q based on its spectral response, etc.). Fluctuations in interframe exposures, along a sequence of images, give rise to a comparametric relationship between successive pairs of images. This allows us to estimate the response function of the camera (to derive the quantimetric unit q) as well as the relative differences in exposure. A new method of video image processing that exploits multiple differently exposed pictures (frames of the video sequence) of overlapping subject matter is thus possible. The method may be used whenever a video camera having automatic exposure captures multiple frames of video with the same subject matter appearing in regions of overlap between at least some of the successive video frames. Since almost all cameras have an automatic exposure feature, typically center weighted, when a light object falls in the center of the frame the exposure is automatically decreased, whereas the exposure is automatically increased when the camera swings around to point at a darker object. Such fluctuations in gain may be used to estimate the camera's response function, to estimate exposure differences, to do quantimetric processing, as well as to obtain images having both extended dynamic range and extended dynamic domain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".