A High Consistency Color Correction System in an Inkjet Printer
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
A variety of sources of variability cause inconsistent color reproduction in Inkjet Printers. Difference in the size of drops ejected, paper type and environmental conditions, to name a few, can lead to big differences in the printed colors. This paper describes a system based on sensing the color shift with respect to pre-determined color targets and compensating for it. The system relies on a combination of several components that work together to provide the best results while minimizing cost and user intervention. The key components are: a built-in sensor tuned to get estimates of ink density in the particular ink/media system, a sensor characterization process, a user triggered calibration process that senses and corrects the color errors and a set of color profiles built in the printer's driver.A periodical calibration of the printer/media system ensures consistent and accurate colors in the output. The performance achieved is currently the leading edge in inkjet printers, enabling color accuracy errors below 4 dEab* maximum, which is at least 50% more accurate than most Inkjet printers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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