MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605652381 · doi:10.1186/s40494-017-0135-4

Automated displacement measurements on historical canvases

2017· article· en· W2605652381 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fausto Del Sette, Fabrizio Patanè, Stefano Rossi, Mauro Torre, P. Cappa

Bibliographic record

VenueHeritage Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council Canada
KeywordsDisplacement (psychology)Artifact (error)Computer scienceComputer visionPhotogrammetryArtificial intelligenceTriangulationLaserPlanarMaterials scienceComputer graphics (images)OpticsPhysicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In this paper we describe a configurable system based on laser displacement sensors for the contactless acquisition of 3D and 2D shapes of near-planar objects such as the paintings. Methods The system is based on two single-point laser triangulation sensors, a planar robot and a suite of software for driving the sensors, acquiring and post-processing the collected data. As a demonstration of the developed system we monitored three artifacts with the different aims to monitor the elastic properties of the artworks and the effectiveness of support frames in compensating the micro-climate fluctuations: the “Annunciazione” Antonello da Messina, the “Paliotto di San Domenico”, and the “Portiera Oddi-Montesperelli”. Results In the “Annunciazione” case, the canvas response to tensioning trials was analyzed. The collected data permitted to quantify a maximum displacement of 0.9 and 1.5 mm for the tensioning tests at 1 and 2 mm, respectively. In the “Portiera” case, the displacement difference between the left and right canvas sides was (1.0 ± 0.13)%, due to the inherent anisotropy of the material and by the structure of the artifact. In the “Paliotto” case, instead, minor displacement variations of the gilt leather due to the environment were observed, due to the analysis conducted prior of the restoration. Conclusions The overall obtained results demonstrated that the system is able to provide useful data for the art conservation field, with a max inaccuracy less than 100 μm.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHeritage ScienceSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207