MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390272395 · doi:10.3390/app14010235

A Novel Line-Scan Algorithm for Unsynchronised Dynamic Measurements

2023· article· en· W4390272395 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Verspeek, Thomas De Kerf, Bart Ribbens, Xavier Maldague, Steve Vanlanduit, Gunther Steenackers

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsSubpixel renderingImage stitchingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer sciencePixelVignettingSample (material)Frame rateOpticsAlgorithmPhysicsLens (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In non-destructive inspections today, the size of the sample being examined is often limited to fit within the field of view of the camera being used. When examining larger specimens, multiple image sequences need to be stitched together into one image. Due to uneven illumination, the combined image may have artificial defects. This manuscript provides a solution for performing line-scan measurements from a sample and combining the images to avoid these artificial defects. The proposed algorithm calculates the pixel shift, either through checkerboard detection or by field of view (FOV) calculation, for each image to create the stitched image. This working principle eliminates the need for synchronisation between the motion speed of the object and the frame rate of the camera. The algorithm is tested with several cameras that operate in different wavelengths (ultraviolet (UV), visible near infrared (Vis-NIR) and long-wave infrared (LWIR)), each with the corresponding light sources. Results show that the algorithm is able to achieve subpixel stitching accuracy. The side effects of heterogeneous illumination can be solved using the proposed method.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207