MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400231801 · doi:10.1002/lpor.202400219

Capturing Transient Events in Series: A Review of Framing Photography

2024· review· en· W4400231801 on OpenAlexaff
Yunhua Yao, Xianglei Liu, Dalong Qi, Jiali Yao, Chengzhi Jin, Yu He, Zhengqi Huang, Yilin He, Yuecheng Shen, Lianzhong Deng, Zhiyong Wang, Zhenrong Sun, Jinyang Liang, Shian Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueLaser & Photonics Review · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesScience and Technology Commission of Shanghai MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFraming (construction)Series (stratigraphy)PhotographyComputer scienceRemote sensingHistoryVisual artsArtGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Observing transient events is of great importance for understanding fundamental principles and further controlling the related processes. To surmount the limitations of human vision, special tools are required to detect and record these transient events. Among existing approaches, framing photography stands out by its high spatiotemporal resolution with a 2D field of view and low crosstalk between adjacent frames. This review aims to summarize the technical routes of framing photography and provide a guide for choosing suitable tools for the observation of transient phenomena. The basic principles of framing photography are introduced and then an overview of the main categories by analyzing the system configurations and working principles are presented. Then, the existing devices are classified into mechanical, electrical, and optical framing photography. For each category, representative techniques and applications are discussed. Finally, a prospect for framing photography is provided.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations21
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaser & Photonics ReviewSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207