MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1565409700 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v26i1.8378

Parsing Outdoor Scenes from Streamed 3D Laser Data Using Online Clustering and Incremental Belief Updates

2021· article· en· W1565409700 on OpenAlexaff
Rudolph Triebel, Rohan Paul, Daniela Rus, Paul Newman

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilOffice of Naval ResearchMultidisciplinary University Research Initiative
KeywordsComputer scienceParsingCluster analysisArtificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we address the problem of continually parsing a stream of 3D point cloud data acquired from a laser sensor mounted on a road vehicle. We leverage an online star clustering algorithm coupled with an incremental belief update in an evolving undirected graphical model. The fusion of these techniques allows the robot to parse streamed data and to continually improve its understanding of the world. The core competency produced is an ability to infer object classes from similarities based on appearance and shape features, and to concurrently combine that with a spatial smoothing algorithm incorporating geometric consistency. This formulation of feature-space star clustering modulating the potentials of a spatial graphical model is entirely novel. In our method, the two sources of information: feature similarity and geometrical consistency are fed continu- ally into the system, improving the belief over the class distributions as new data arrives. The algorithm obviates the need for hand-labeled training data and makes no apriori assumptions on the number or characteristics of object categories. Rather, they are learnt incrementally over time from streamed input data. In experiments per- formed on real 3D laser data from an outdoor scene, we show that our approach is capable of obtaining an ever- improving unsupervised scene categorization.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207