MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2506649739 · doi:10.82308/38421

Investigating blur in the framework of reverse projection

2008· article· en· W2506649739 on OpenAlexaff
Scott McCloskey

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicImage Processing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceClassification of discontinuitiesPixelProjection (relational algebra)Focus (optics)Computer scienceObject (grammar)MathematicsAlgorithmOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents a reverse projection model for image formation, which is particularly useful for explaining blur. The model is used to develop novel methods for two different applications: removing the effects of blurred occluding objects and recovering the 3D structure of scenes from defocused images. With respect to depth recovery, the model shows that, when out of focus, multiple pixels record light reflected from the same region of the scene, giving rise to a measurable increase in the correlation between such pixels. Having found that increase to be proportional to scene depth, correlation measurements are used to estimate the depth of objects in a scene, giving a new method for the recovery of depth from defocus. In addition, this thesis presents a method by which this and other depth from defocus methods can be made more accurate by evolving the region over which blur is measured. Using an elliptical model for the measurement region, it is shown that a straightforward algorithm can be used to produce more accurate depth estimates near discontinuities in depth and surface orientation. With respect to occluding objects, the reverse projection blur framework is used to model image formation near large discontinuities in depth. This leads to a validated model that describes the way in which light from the foreground and background objects combine on a camera's sensor, and a method for the removal of the contribution of the occluding object. In order facilitate the removal of the occluding object's intensity from single images without user intervention, a method is developed to estimate the parameters necessary to remove this contribution.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.752
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207