| 1. |
-
- 2019
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 2. |
- Luo, Yifei, et al.
(author)
-
Technology Roadmap for Flexible Sensors
- 2023
-
In: ACS Nano. - : American Chemical Society. - 1936-0851 .- 1936-086X. ; 17:6, s. 5211-5295
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Humans rely increasingly on sensors to address grand challenges and to improve quality of life in the era of digitalization and big data. For ubiquitous sensing, flexible sensors are developed to overcome the limitations of conventional rigid counterparts. Despite rapid advancement in bench-side research over the last decade, the market adoption of flexible sensors remains limited. To ease and to expedite their deployment, here, we identify bottlenecks hindering the maturation of flexible sensors and propose promising solutions. We first analyze challenges in achieving satisfactory sensing performance for real-world applications and then summarize issues in compatible sensor-biology interfaces, followed by brief discussions on powering and connecting sensor networks. Issues en route to commercialization and for sustainable growth of the sector are also analyzed, highlighting environmental concerns and emphasizing nontechnical issues such as business, regulatory, and ethical considerations. Additionally, we look at future intelligent flexible sensors. In proposing a comprehensive roadmap, we hope to steer research efforts towards common goals and to guide coordinated development strategies from disparate communities. Through such collaborative efforts, scientific breakthroughs can be made sooner and capitalized for the betterment of humanity.
|
|
| 3. |
- Menkveld, Albert J., et al.
(author)
-
Nonstandard Errors
- 2024
-
In: JOURNAL OF FINANCE. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 0022-1082 .- 1540-6261. ; 79:3, s. 2339-2390
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In statistics, samples are drawn from a population in a data-generating process (DGP). Standard errors measure the uncertainty in estimates of population parameters. In science, evidence is generated to test hypotheses in an evidence-generating process (EGP). We claim that EGP variation across researchers adds uncertainty-nonstandard errors (NSEs). We study NSEs by letting 164 teams test the same hypotheses on the same data. NSEs turn out to be sizable, but smaller for more reproducible or higher rated research. Adding peer-review stages reduces NSEs. We further find that this type of uncertainty is underestimated by participants.
|
|
| 4. |
- Kristanl, Matej, et al.
(author)
-
The Seventh Visual Object Tracking VOT2019 Challenge Results
- 2019
-
In: 2019 IEEE/CVF INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTER VISION WORKSHOPS (ICCVW). - : IEEE COMPUTER SOC. - 9781728150239 ; , s. 2206-2241
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Visual Object Tracking challenge VOT2019 is the seventh annual tracker benchmarking activity organized by the VOT initiative. Results of 81 trackers are presented; many are state-of-the-art trackers published at major computer vision conferences or in journals in the recent years. The evaluation included the standard VOT and other popular methodologies for short-term tracking analysis as well as the standard VOT methodology for long-term tracking analysis. The VOT2019 challenge was composed of five challenges focusing on different tracking domains: (i) VOT-ST2019 challenge focused on short-term tracking in RGB, (ii) VOT-RT2019 challenge focused on "real-time" short-term tracking in RGB, (iii) VOT-LT2019 focused on long-term tracking namely coping with target disappearance and reappearance. Two new challenges have been introduced: (iv) VOT-RGBT2019 challenge focused on short-term tracking in RGB and thermal imagery and (v) VOT-RGBD2019 challenge focused on long-term tracking in RGB and depth imagery. The VOT-ST2019, VOT-RT2019 and VOT-LT2019 datasets were refreshed while new datasets were introduced for VOT-RGBT2019 and VOT-RGBD2019. The VOT toolkit has been updated to support both standard short-term, long-term tracking and tracking with multi-channel imagery. Performance of the tested trackers typically by far exceeds standard baselines. The source code for most of the trackers is publicly available from the VOT page. The dataset, the evaluation kit and the results are publicly available at the challenge website(1).
|
|
