MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1726243938 · doi:10.1117/12.2184607

Self-calibration of a structured light based scanner for use in archeological applications

2015· article· en· W1726243938 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Jahraus, Derek D. Lichti, Peter Dawson

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScannerCalibrationComputer scienceProcess (computing)Scale (ratio)PlanarScale factor (cosmology)Plane (geometry)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)PhysicsMathematicsGeometryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is frequently necessary in archaeology to map excavated features so their structure can be recorded before they are dismantled in order for the excavation to continue. This process can be time consuming, error prone and manually intensive. Three-dimensional recording devices, which have the advantage of being faster, less labor intensive and more detailed, present an attractive alternative method of mapping. A small, portable hand scanner such as the DotProduct DPI-7, could be used for this purpose. However, the three-dimensional data collected from this device contain systematic distortions that cause errors in the recorded shape of the features being mapped. The performance of the DPI-7 scanner is evaluated in this paper using self-calibration based techniques. A calibration field consisting of spherical targets rigidly mounted on a planar background was imaged from multiple locations, and the target deviations from expected locations are used to quantify the performance of the device. The largest source of systematic error in the DPI-7 data was found to be a scale error affecting dimensions orthogonal to the depth. These in-plane distortions were modeled using a single scale factor parameter in the self-calibration solution, resulting in a 54% reduction in the RMS coordinate errors.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207