MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311480772 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2356060/v1

Large-scale volumetric particle tracking using a single camera: Analysis of the scalability and accuracy of glare-point particle tracking

2022· preprint· en· W4311480772 on OpenAlexaff
Frieder Kaiser, David E. Rival

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFlow Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersCalifornia Institute of Technology
KeywordsTracking (education)BubbleSoap bubbleScalabilityWind tunnelParticle tracking velocimetryComputer scienceOpticsParticle (ecology)Generator (circuit theory)Scale (ratio)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionPhysicsTurbulencePower (physics)Particle image velocimetryMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent advances in tracer, illumination, and camera technology, paired with new processing algorithms, have been pushing the limits of scale for three-dimensional flow measurements. The present study explores the state-of-the-art and discusses the current progress towards full-scale, in situ flow measurements in very large measurement volumes of order 10m² or larger. In particular, we focus on industrial and environmental applications, where the measurement time, the processing time, and overall system cost all have to be minimized. With the glare-point particle tracking (GPPT) approach, we present a cost and time-efficient volumetric measurement technique using a single-camera setup, air-filled soap bubbles (AFSBs), and natural illumination. The GPPT approach is tested and characterized in a pyramidal-shaped measurement volume ($V=18m³) in an outdoor, open-jet wind tunnel. Bubbles of uniform size are produced by a bubble-generator prototype and illuminated by the sun. The uniform bubble size enables a depth estimate for each bubble based on the glare-point spacing in the images from a single camera, thereby removing the need for additional cameras and perspectives. The measurement accuracy of the GPPT is then assessed by: (a) characterizing the performance of the bubble-generator prototype; (b) analyzing bubble deformation and its effects; and (c) assessing the accuracy of the depth estimate based on glare-point spacing. Finally, the scalability of the approach is discussed and, based on the light scattering behavior of large AFSBs, a discussion is made of how GPPT will enable three-dimensional flow characterization in very large measurement volumes (V=O(100m³)) in the near future.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.253 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicFlow Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207