MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044592780 · doi:10.1111/cgf.14055

Practical Measurement and Reconstruction of Spectral Skin Reflectance

2020· article· en· W3044592780 on OpenAlexaff
Yuliya Gitlina, Giuseppe Claudio Guarnera, D. S. Dhillon, John Hansen, Alexandros Lattas, Dinesh K. Pai, Abhijeet Ghosh

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsComputer scienceMultispectral imageArtificial intelligenceRendering (computer graphics)Computer visionReflectivityLookup tableSpectral imagingOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present two practical methods for measurement of spectral skin reflectance suited for live subjects, and drive a spectral BSSRDF model with appropriate complexity to match skin appearance in photographs, including human faces. Our primary measurement method employs illuminating a subject with two complementary uniform spectral illumination conditions using a multispectral LED sphere to estimate spatially varying parameters of chromophore concentrations including melanin and hemoglobin concentration, melanin blend‐type fraction, and epidermal hemoglobin fraction. We demonstrate that our proposed complementary measurements enable higher‐quality estimate of chromophores than those obtained using standard broadband illumination, while being suitable for integration with multiview facial capture using regular color cameras. Besides novel optimal measurements under controlled illumination, we also demonstrate how to adapt practical skin patch measurements using a hand‐held dermatological skin measurement device, a Miravex Antera 3D camera, for skin appearance reconstruction and rendering. Furthermore, we introduce a novel approach for parameter estimation given the measurements using neural networks which is significantly faster than a lookup table search and avoids parameter quantization. We demonstrate high quality matches of skin appearance with photographs for a variety of skin types with our proposed practical measurement procedures, including photorealistic spectral reproduction and renderings of facial appearance.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207