MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123806511 · doi:10.15353/jcvis.v6i1.3556

Locally Adaptive Thresholding for Single-Shot Structured Light Patterns

2021· article· en· W3123806511 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Kasra Sadatsharifi, Mohamed A. Naiel, Mark Lamm, Paul Fieguth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage Enhancement Techniques
Canadian institutionsChristie (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThresholdingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceBalanced histogram thresholdingProjectorImage (mathematics)Computer visionSensitivity (control systems)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image processingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image thresholding is a challenging task due to its sensitivity to environmental variations and degradation in the quality of the captured image. Although many image thresholding methods have been introduced, most of them require the fine tuning of a thresholding parameter that is not suitable for single-shot structured light (SSSL) based projector-camera applications. In this paper, we introduce a locally adaptive thresholding method with automatic parameter selection based on the local statistics of the distinct image partitions. For assessing the proposed scheme, we introduce an evaluation that relies on mapping SSSL patterns between the camera and projector spaces. Experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed technique by maintaining the thresholding accuracy of the baseline method, without the need to fine tune the obtained thresholding parameter or any noticeable change in the qualitative results.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging SystemsSame topicImage Enhancement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207