MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417000524 · doi:10.1145/3763356

Glare Pattern Depiction: High-Fidelity Physical Computation and Physiologically-Inspired Visual Response

2025· article· en· W4417000524 on OpenAlexafffund
Gladimir V. G. Baranoski

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGLAREComputer graphicsIlluminanceBrightnessPupilComputationGraphicsFresnel diffractionGlobal illuminationDiffraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When observing an intense light source, humans perceive dense radiating spikes known as glare/starburst patterns. These patterns are frequently used in computer graphics applications to enhance the perception of brightness (e.g., in games and films). Previous works have computed the physical energy distribution of glare patterns under daytime conditions using approximations like Fresnel diffraction. These techniques are capable of producing visually believable results, particularly when the pupil remains small. However, they are insufficient under nighttime conditions, when the pupil is significantly dilated and the assumptions behind the approximations no longer hold. To address this, we employ the Rayleigh-Sommerfeld diffraction solution, from which Fresnel diffraction is derived as an approximation, as our baseline reference. In pursuit of performance and visual quality, we also employ Ochoa's approximation and the Chirp Z transform to efficiently generate high-resolution results for computer graphics applications. By also taking into account background illumination and certain physiological characteristics of the human photoreceptor cells, particularly the visual threshold of light stimulus, we propose a framework capable of producing plausible visual depictions of glare patterns for both daytime and nighttime scenes.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.301 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207