MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1432922377 · doi:10.1167/15.12.727

Estimating 3D surface properties of natural scenes

2015· article· en· W1432922377 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alex Muryy, Wendy J. Adams, James H. Elder, Erich W. Graf, Arthur J. Lugtigheid

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsPoint cloudRange (aeronautics)Computer scienceTangentSurface (topology)Point (geometry)Artificial intelligenceStandard deviationMathematicsComputer visionAlgorithmStatisticsGeographyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The University of Southampton (UK) and York University (Canada) have collaborated to build the Southampton-York Natural Scenes (SYNS) public dataset. Our goal is to provide a resource that can be used to relate properties of the human visual system to the statistics of natural scenes. At each scene a 3D point cloud was captured with a Leica P20 LiDAR system over a nearly spherical field of view. Registered spherical high dynamic range monocular imagery and panoramic stereo pairs were also recorded. To derive statistical models of natural surfaces, and to relate these surface models to photometric information in associated imagery, we must first develop reliable methods for estimating surface properties from point cloud data. A standard method for identifying the surface normal at a selected 3D point is to compute the smallest eigenvector of the spatial covariance matrix of k points lying closest to selected point. The main problem with this approach is determining the optimal neighbourhood size k. Here we evaluate a novel adaptive method based upon leave-one-out cross-validation. Specifically, at each point we sweep over a broad range of potential neighborhood sizes (k = 4…100), each time computing k estimates of the surface normal based on k-1 points and measuring error as the deviation of the remaining validation point from the estimated tangent plane. The optimal k is that which yields the lowest mean k-fold cross-validation error. We demonstrate that this adaptive method works reliably for diverse scenes in urban and rural environments. Typically a very local neighbourhood (mode of k = 8) is selected, but the distribution has a strong positive tail, particularly for urban environments, where planar surfaces can be estimated more reliably with larger neighbourhoods. We discuss how higher-order geometric surface properties of natural scene data can estimated using similar methods. Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2015

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vision→Same topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications→French-language works237,207→