MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045206248 · doi:10.5937/vojtehg68-26985

Modulation transfer function in the analysis of electro-optical system performance

2020· article· en· W3045206248 on OpenAlexaff
Nedeljko Pađen, Dragana Perić, Branko Livada, Milan Milosavljević

Bibliographic record

VenueVojnotehnicki glasnik · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrared Target Detection Methodologies
Canadian institutionsBrantford Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptical transfer functionTransfer functionComputer scienceLimit (mathematics)Cutoff frequencyModulation (music)Spatial frequencyFrequency responseOpticsFunction (biology)Electronic engineeringPhysicsAcousticsEngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction/purpose: The Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) is a useful tool for an imaging system performance analysis. It is used in Electro-Optical (EO) system design, verification of targeted system parameters, but also in optimization tasks for systems under test. This methodology based on the linear systems theory allows the performance analysis of complicated EO systems to be divided into subsystems. In this paper, the MTF methodology will be presented and explained, followed by the measurements performed in the electro-optical laboratory. The MTF measurements were performed on three types of cameras spectral bands, after which the results were compared to in different the model expectations and theoretical limits for the imaging system. For one of the sensors, the limiting frequency was also measured using the USAF 1951 test target which allowed the comparison between the methods. Methods: Laboratory measurements and theoretical mathematical calculations. Results: Based on the laboratory and theoretical results, the measurement results were further analyzed. Conclusion: The measurements have proven that the calculated cutoff frequency and the MTF curve represent the limit for the real measured system performance. Therefore, this study has confirmed that the MTF can be convenient for finding system limitations and bottlenecks and for increasing the overall performance of the system.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVojnotehnicki glasnikSame topicInfrared Target Detection MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207