End-to-end simulation process in lens design software for integral imaging-based 3D light field displays evaluation
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
Currently, three-dimensional (3D) light field displays (LFDs) based on integral imaging (InIm) are one of the most interesting technologies in the field of 3D displays. The InIm principle consists of two key stages: the capture and reconstruction of the light field describing a specific 3D scene. However, these stages represent two distinct processes requiring different tools and resources, making the evaluation of InIm-based 3D LFDs a laborious and time consuming task. To address those problems, we propose an end-to-end simulation model developed in the commercial lens design software Ansys Zemax OpticStudio, that integrates the two stages of the InIm to facilitate the evaluation of the entire 3D image formation process. This work aims to provide a preliminary solution by ensuring that the targeted specifications are checked and achieved before embarking on the development of a costly and time-consuming prototype.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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