| Literature DB >> 34063664 |
Seong-Chel Park1, Kwan-Ho Park1, Joon-Hyuk Chang1.
Abstract
We propose a deep-learning algorithm that directly compensates for luminance degradation because of the deterioration of organic light-emitting diode (OLED) devices to address the burn-in phenomenon of OLED displays. Conventional compensation circuits are encumbered by high cost of the development and manufacturing processes because of their complexity. However, given that deep-learning algorithms are typically mounted onto systems on chip (SoC), the complexity of the circuit design is reduced, and the circuit can be reused by only relearning the changed characteristics of the new pixel device. The proposed approach comprises deep-feature generation and multistream self-attention, which decipher the importance of the variables, and the correlation between burn-in-related variables. It also utilizes a deep neural network that identifies the nonlinear relationship between extracted features and luminance degradation. Thereafter, luminance degradation is estimated from burn-in-related variables, and the burn-in phenomenon can be addressed by compensating for luminance degradation. Experiment results revealed that compensation was successfully achieved within an error range of 4.56%, and demonstrated the potential of a new approach that could mitigate the burn-in phenomenon by directly compensating for pixel-level luminance deviation.Entities:
Keywords: artificial intelligence; compensation circuit; convolutional neural networks; deep neural network; luminance degradation; organic light-emitting diode (OLED); thin-film transistor (TFT)
Year: 2021 PMID: 34063664 PMCID: PMC8125672 DOI: 10.3390/s21093182
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Proposed data simulator.
Specifications of input videos.
| Contents | Specifications |
|---|---|
| Content 1 (40 min) | Documentary, action, news, sports |
| Content 2 (40 min) | Entertainment, beauty, animation, car review |
| Content 3 (40 min) | Game, cooking, job introduction, romance |
Paper nomenclature.
| Symbol | Parameter | Symbol | Parameter |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| Data of input video |
| Total frame of input video |
|
| Frame |
| Total pixel |
|
| Pixel |
| Time |
|
| Operating time per pixel |
| Weighted operating time |
|
| Brightness of per pixel |
| Average brightness per pixel |
|
| Noise of threshold voltage |
| Noise of mobility |
|
| Reduction factor of shifting value of threshold voltage |
| Reduction factor of threshold voltage |
|
| Reduction factor of mobility |
| Maximum input current of TFT |
|
| Length of TFT channel |
| Width of TFT channel |
|
| Data voltage of TFT that consider noise |
| Initial data voltage of TFT |
|
| Capacitor of TFT unit area |
| Initial mobility of TFT |
|
| Threshold voltage of TFT that consider noise |
| Drain voltage of TFT |
|
| Maximal temperature of TFT performance guarantee |
| Shifting value of threshold voltage |
|
| Initial threshold voltage of TFT |
| Weight factor |
|
| Gray level of TFT |
| Total gray level range |
|
| Reduction rate of OLED voltage |
| Temperature |
|
| Transistor parameter |
| Gate capacitor |
|
| Channel width |
Figure 2Bootstrap method.
Figure 3Overview of entire model: (a) deep feature generation; (b) multistream self-attention; (c) deep neural network.
Figure 4Overview of proposed deep-feature generation model.
Figure 5Overview of multihead self-attention model.
Figure 6Overview of proposed deep-neural-network model.
Dataset composition.
| Datasets | Train/Test | Total |
|---|---|---|
| OLED pixel (Blue) | 9.72/1.08 billion | 10.8 billion |
Figure 7Luminance-degradation rate for normalized blue, red, and green pixel data.
Accuracy (in %) comparison of proposed models composed of different hyperparameters with deep-feature generation (layers, kernel, filter size, and units).
| Experiment 1 | Experiment 2 | Experiment 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Layers | Kernel | Layers | Kernel | Layers | Kernel, |
| 1D Conv 1 | 1 × 4 @32 | 1D Conv 1 | 1 × 4 @32 | 1D Conv 1 | 1 × 4 @32 | |
| 1D Conv 2 | 1 × 32 @16 | 1D Conv 2 | 1 × 32 @16 | Dense 1 | 32 | |
| Dense 1 | 16 | Dense 1 | 16 | 1D Conv 2 | 1 × 32 @16 | |
| 1D Conv 3 | 1 × 16 @10 | Dense 2 | 16 | |||
| 1D Conv 3 | 1 × 16 @10 | |||||
| Accuracy | 90.28% |
| 91.45% | |||
Accuracy (in %) comparison of the proposed models with multistream self-attention [29].
| Experimental Details | Experiment 1 | Experiment 2 |
|---|---|---|
| 1-Stream Self-Attention | 2-Stream Self-Attention | |
| Accuracy | 90.75% |
|
Accuracy (in %) comparison of proposed models with different numbers of deep-neural-network layers.
| Experiment 1 | Experiment 2 | Experiment 3 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Layer Number | Units | Layer Number | Units | Layer Number | Units | |
|
| Dense layer 1 | 64 | Dense layer 1 | 64 | Dense layer 1 | 64 |
| Dense layer 2 | 64 | Dense layer 2 | 64 | Dense layer 2 | 64 | |
| Dense layer 3 | 64 | Dense layer 3 | 64 | Dense layer 3 | 64 | |
| Dense layer 4 | 64 | Dense layer 4 | 64 | Dense layer 4 | 64 | |
| Dense layer 5 | 64 | Dense layer 5 | 64 | |||
| Dense layer 6 | 64 | |||||
| Accuracy | 89.94% | 91.22% |
| |||
Accuracy (in %) comparison of proposed models with different numbers of units of deep-neural-network layers.
| Layer Number | Experiment 1 | Experiment 2 | Experiment 3 | Experiment 4 | Experiment 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Units | ||||||
|
| Dense layer 1 | 64 | 128 | 256 | 256 | 256 |
| Dense layer 2 | 64 | 128 | 256 | 128 | 128 | |
| Dense layer 3 | 64 | 128 | 256 | 128 | 128 | |
| Dense layer 4 | 64 | 128 | 256 | 256 | 256 | |
| Dense layer 5 | 64 | 128 | 256 | 128 | 128 | |
| Dense layer 6 | 64 | 128 | 256 | 64 | 128 | |
| Accuracy | 92.58% | 93.35% | 93.76% |
| 95.10% | |
Figure 8Image of OLED display (400 × 300) according to number of pixels. (a) Initial display image; (b) image in which luminance degradation occurred; (c) image when degraded luminance was compensated.