Computational Visualization of Semi-transparent Metallic Thin Films with Roughness
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We model the visual appearance of thin, semi-transparent metallic films coated on arbitrary three-dimensional substrates, incorporating effects including nanoscale film roughness, microscale substrate roughness, and source of light. Film reflectance is modeled by combining electrodynamic simulations with a modified version of the Schlick approximation, which is adapted and validated to describe the color appearance of thin semi-transparent metallic films with nanoscale, subwavelength roughness. Diffuse scattering originating from microscale roughness of the substrate and partial reflectance is described by a microfacet model. Photorealistic rendered images generated by our approach are qualitatively compared to photographs of fabricated thin film samples under similar lighting conditions. We render images of semi-transparent metallic films as a function of film thickness, multilayer composition, substrate type, nanoscale film roughness, microscale substrate roughness, and environmental lighting, yielding physically plausible results consistent with previously reported observations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it