MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806597708 · doi:10.1109/iccphot.2018.8368472

Rolling shutter imaging on the electric grid

2018· article· en· W2806597708 on OpenAlexaff
Mark Sheinin, Yoav Y. Schechner, Kiriakos N. Kutulakos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrowetting and Microfluidic Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShutterFlickerComputer scienceRolling shutterRendering (computer graphics)Computer visionPixelArtificial intelligenceGridImage sensorComputer graphics (images)Real-time computingOpticsPhysicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flicker of AC-powered lights is useful for probing the electric grid and unmixing reflected contributions of different sources. Flicker has been sensed in great detail with a specially-designed camera tethered to an AC outlet. We argue that even an untethered smartphone can achieve the same task. We exploit the inter-row exposure delay of the ubiquitous rolling-shutter sensor. When pixel exposure time is kept short, this delay creates a spatiotemporal wave pattern that encodes (1) the precise capture time relative to the AC, (2) the response function of individual bulbs, and (3) the AC phase that powers them. To sense point sources, we induce the spatiotemporal wave pattern by placing a star filter or a paper diffuser in front of the camera's lens. We demonstrate several new capabilities, including: high-rate acquisition of bulb response functions from one smartphone photo; recognition of bulb type and phase from one or two images; and rendering of live flicker video, as if it came from a high speed global-shutter camera.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.173 · 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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectrowetting and Microfluidic TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207