MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402666395 · doi:10.1109/tip.2024.3459611

Optimized Pattern Partitioning for Multi-Pass Printing: PARAOMASKING

2024· article· en· W4402666395 on OpenAlexaff
Utpal Sarkar, Héctor Gómez, Ján Morovič, Peter Morovič

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Image Processing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsHewlett-Packard (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In halftone-driven imaging pipelines focus is often placed on halftone pattern design as the main contributor to overall output quality. However, for sequential or cumulative imaging technologies, such as multi-pass printing, an important element is also pattern partitioning - how the overall halftone pattern is divided among the different partial imaging events such as printing passes. Partitioning is usually designed agnostically of the halftone pattern, making it impossible to optimize for the joint effect of halftone and partitioning. However, even a good halftone pattern coupled with a good partitioning scheme does not guarantee well partitioned halftones and can impact image quality attributes. In this paper a novel approach called PARAOMASKING is presented that benefits from the pattern-determinism of PARAWACS halftoning and proposes a partitioning scheme for multi-pass printing such that optimality is also obtained for partitioned halftones. Results - both digital and printed - show how it can lead to significant improvements in partial pattern quality and overall pattern quality. Consequently, output attributes such as grain, coalescence and pattern robustness are improved. The focus here is on blue-noise pattern preservation but the approach can also be extended to other objectives, e.g., maximizing per-pass clustering.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Image ProcessingSame topicDigital Image Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207