MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2937108468 · doi:10.1109/jetcas.2019.2911899

Low-Power Computer Vision: Status, Challenges, and Opportunities

2019· article· en· W2937108468 on OpenAlexaff
Sergei Alyamkin, Matthew Ardi, Alexander C. Berg, Achille Brighton, Bo Chen, Yiran Chen, Hsin-Pai Cheng, Zichen Fan, Chen Feng, Bo Fu, Kent Gauen, Abhinav Goel, Alexander Goncharenko, Xuyang Guo, Soonhoi Ha, Andrew Howard, Yuanjun Huang, Donghyun Kang, Jaeyoun Kim, Jong Gook Ko, A. I. Kondratyev, Jun-Hyeok Lee, Seungjae Lee, Suwoong Lee, Zichao Li, Zhiyu Liang, Juzheng Liu, Xin Liu, Yang Lu, Yung-Hsiang Lu, Deeptanshu Malik, Hong Hanh Nguyen, Eunbyung Park, Denis Repin, Liang Shen, Tao Sheng, Fei Sun, David Svitov, George K. Thiruvathukal, Baiwu Zhang, Jingchi Zhang, Xiaopeng Zhang, Shaojie Zhuo

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal on Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCCD and CMOS Imaging Sensors
Canadian institutionsQualcomm (Canada)
FundersXilinxElectronics and Telecommunications Research InstituteNvidiaMediaTekGoogleFacebook
KeywordsPower (physics)Computer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineering physicsEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computer vision has achieved impressive progress in recent years. Meanwhile, mobile phones have become the primary computing platforms for millions of people. In addition to mobile phones, many autonomous systems rely on visual data for making decisions, and some of these systems have limited energy (such as unmanned aerial vehicles also called drones and mobile robots). These systems rely on batteries, and energy efficiency is critical. This paper serves the following two main purposes. First, examine the state of the art for low-power solutions to detect objects in images. Since 2015, the IEEE Annual International Low-Power Image Recognition Challenge (LPIRC) has been held to identify the most energy-efficient computer vision solutions. This paper summarizes the 2018 winners’ solutions. Second, suggest directions for research as well as opportunities for low-power computer vision.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations76
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal on Emerging and Selected Topics in Circuits and SystemsSame topicCCD and CMOS Imaging SensorsFrench-language works237,207