MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221079221 · doi:10.1364/josaa.446785

Analyzing color imaging failure on consumer-grade cameras

2022· article· en· W4221079221 on OpenAlexafffund
SaiKiran Tedla, Yunyuan Wang, Maitri Patel, Michael S. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Optical Society of America A · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Remote sensingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many efforts to employ consumer-grade cameras for home-based health and wellness monitoring. Such applications rely on users to capture images for analysis using their personal cameras in a home environment. When color is a primary feature for diagnostic algorithms, the camera requires calibration to ensure accurate color measurements. Given the importance of these diagnostic tests for the users' health and well-being, it is important to understand the conditions in which color calibration may fail. To this end, we analyzed a wide range of camera sensors and environmental lighting to determine (1) how often color calibration failure is likely to occur and (2) the underlying reasons for failure. Our analysis shows that it is rare to encounter a camera sensor and lighting condition combination that results in color imaging failure. Moreover, when color imaging does fail, the cause is almost always attributed to spectral poor environmental lighting and not the camera sensor. We believe this finding is useful for scientists and engineers developing color-based applications for use with consumer-grade cameras.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Optical Society of America ASame topicColor Science and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207