MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1897693965 · doi:10.1109/robot.1995.525704

Active camera calibration using pan, tilt and roll

2002· article· en· W1897693965 on OpenAlexaff
Anup Basu, Kavita Ravi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceCamera auto-calibrationCamera resectioningComputer scienceCalibrationTilt (camera)Pinhole camera modelFocal lengthImage (mathematics)Noise (video)Set (abstract data type)Point (geometry)Camera matrixMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three dimensional vision applications, such as robot vision, require modelling of the relationship between the 2D images and the 3D world. Camera calibration is a process which accurately models this relationship. The calibration procedure determines the geometric parameters of the camera, such as focal length and center of the image. Most of the existing calibration techniques use predefined patterns and a static camera. Recently, A. Basu (1993) developed a novel calibration technique for computing the focal length and image center which uses an active camera. This technique does not require any predefined patterns or point to point correspondence between images-only a set of scenes with some stable edges. It was observed that the algorithms developed for image center are sensitive to noise and hence unreliable in real situations. The article extends the techniques provided by Basu to develop a simpler, yet more robust method for computing the image center.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207