MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3097815703 · doi:10.1002/jsid.971

Black tonal level reproduction in pulse‐width‐modulated high dynamic range displays

2020· article· en· W3097815703 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Society for Information Display · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Innovation Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLuminanceHigh dynamic rangeComputer scienceDynamic rangePulse-width modulationDisplay deviceComputer visionModulation (music)Artificial intelligenceAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract High dynamic range (HDR) workflows provide increased peak luminance and lower black levels leading to a significantly enhanced quality of experience. HDR pixels also represent more tonal values across the dynamic range by using a higher bit‐depth along with different perceptual transfer functions. However, many light‐emitting display devices modulate light using a limited bit‐depth in the linear domain. It is thus challenging for such display systems to achieve simultaneously high peak luminance and high amount of information in the shadows. In this paper, we summarize pulse‐width modulation (PWM) principles and its impact on low black level reproduction. We then assess the required bit‐depth to accurately reproduce shadow information of an HDR signal for different display capabilities. Finally, we describe several technology improvements that could improve the tonal level reproduction of PWM‐driven displays.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.240 · 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