P‐59: Robust Visual Enhancement of Moving Contents in Projected Imagery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For any projection system, one goal will surely be to maximize the quality of projected imagery at a minimized hardware cost, which is considered a challenging engineering problem. Experience in applying different image filters and enhancements to projected video suggests quite clearly that the quality of a projected enhanced video is very much a function of the content of the video itself; that is, to first order, whether the video contains content which is moving as opposed to still, since the human visual system tolerates much more blur in moving imagery. We would therefore assert that the moving and non‐moving pixels of a given video stream should be enhanced differently, using class‐dependent video enhancement filters to achieve a maximum visual quality. In this paper, we introduce such a novel motion‐dependent content enhancement scheme, based on a pixel‐wise moving / non‐moving classification, with the actual enhancement obtained via class‐dependent Wiener deconvolution filtering. Experimental results on four challenging videos show that the proposed scheme offers improved visual quality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".