MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239849497 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14664726

Towards an automated soft proofing system using high dynamic range imaging and artificial neural networks

2021· preprint· en· W4239849497 on OpenAlexaff
Nawar Fdhal

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProjectorComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionHigh dynamic rangeCompensation (psychology)Computer graphics (images)Process (computing)Artificial neural networkDynamic range

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this thesis, an adaptive mechanism for controlling the illumination is combined with a closed loop technique and the use of High Dynamic range (HDR) to generate a black box model that can simulate the hard proof of a given digital image. An adaptive Artificial Neural Network (ANN) was used to create the black box model, using the camera as a measuring device. The non-uniformity of the illumination in the viewing booth is typically a barrier in creating such a black box model since color appearance varies with location in the viewing booth. This issue was addressed in this thesis by compensation for viewing booth illumination using an inexpensive camera and a Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) projector. HDR was found to give a favourable representation that is more indicative of the image perceived by the operator, and was used as the basis for mapping the original image to the soft proof. A proof of concept was also developed to highlight the utility of the LCD projector based approach in providing a more broad range of varying intensity color illuminants (thus environments) under which a proof may be not only viewed, but modeled through the closed loop process. In this sense, a system has been developed to generate and provide custom soft proofs that can extend the functionality of the standard viewing booth. The proposed technique will open the doors to new automated systems that can be very beneficial to the printing industry.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.857
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207