MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293798209 · doi:10.23977/acss.2022.060305

Phase Completion for Fringe Projection Profiler Based on Neural Networks

2022· article· en· W4293798209 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Computer Signals and Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)Artificial neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceStructured-light 3D scannerProjection (relational algebra)Computer visionPhase (matter)AlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fringe projection profiler (FPP) measures the geometry of the target surface by projecting the pre-modulated stripe map onto the surface, and then capture the phase map with a camera. However, the inaccurate exposure or the characteristics of the surface reflectance may influence the imaging quality of the phase map, leaving some over-exposure and under-exposure regions. Addressing to this problem, this paper propose to apply a neural network to complete the phase map. Firstly, we propose a synthetic dataset to simulate the phase map of the inaccurate exposure regions, based on a physical rendering model. After that, we implement a transformer neural network to complete the missing phase information. Experiments show that the proposed neural network can complete the missing information from its neighbouring information, and provide precise completion 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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.263 · 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