MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409399869 · doi:10.1002/jsid.2077

A new metric for LED display brightness assessment

2025· article· en· W4409399869 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Society for Information Display · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicColor Science and Applications
Canadian institutionsChristie (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBrightnessMetric (unit)LED displayComputer graphics (images)Computer visionOpticsPhysicsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Accurate estimation and brightness‐calibration of individual LEDs in large display walls is crucial to the delivery of high‐quality content. Viewpoint angle and sampling artifacts due to pixelization are key challenges in achieving precise brightness estimation. In this work, we propose a novel metric for assessing brightness accuracy, based on the consistency of brightness estimation between two closely spaced camera viewpoints, which maintain the same angular perspective while altering the camera pixel alignment with the LED grid. Experimental results demonstrate that EBA effectively quantifies the accuracy of any method used to mitigate sampling artifacts.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.297 · 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