MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162513140 · doi:10.1109/3dtv.2009.5069666

Optimal pixel aspect ratio for stereoscopic 3D displays under practical viewing conditions

2009· article· en· W2162513140 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Imaging Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStereoscopyPixelComputer scienceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceProcess (computing)Stereo displayViewing angleImage resolutionImage (mathematics)Computer graphics (images)Liquid-crystal display

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In multiview 3DTVs the original 3D-scene is reconstructed based on the corresponding pixels of adjacent 2D views. For conventional 2D display the highest image quality is usually achieved by uniform distribution of pixels. However, recent studies on the 3D reconstruction process show that for a given total resolution, a non-uniform horizontally-finer resolution yields better visual experience on 3D displays. Unfortunately, none of these studies explicitly model practical viewing conditions, such as the role of the 3D display as a medium and behavior of the human eyes. In this paper the previous models are extended by incorporating these factors into the optimization process. Based on this extended formulation the optimal ratios are calculated for a few typical viewing configurations. Some supporting subjective studies are presented as well.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.555

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Imaging TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207