MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987451068 · doi:10.1117/12.2082860

Multi-polarimetric textural distinctiveness for outdoor robotic saliency detection

2015· article· en· W1987451068 on OpenAlexaff
Shahid A. Haider, Christian Scharfenberger, Farnoud Kazemzadeh, Alexander Wong, David A. Clausi

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVisual Attention and Saliency Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionPolarimetryOptimal distinctiveness theoryObject detectionPattern recognition (psychology)Leverage (statistics)PixelMobile robotInvariant (physics)RobotMathematicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile robots that rely on vision, for navigation and object detection, use saliency approaches to identify a set of potential candidates to recognize. The state of the art in saliency detection for mobile robotics often rely upon visible light imaging, using conventional camera setups, to distinguish an object against its surroundings based on factors such as feature compactness, heterogeneity and/or homogeneity. We are demonstrating a novel multi- polarimetric saliency detection approach which uses multiple measured polarization states of a scene. We leverage the light-material interaction known as Fresnel reflections to extract rotationally invariant multi-polarimetric textural representations to then train a high dimensional sparse texture model. The multi-polarimetric textural distinctiveness is characterized using a conditional probability framework based on the sparse texture model which is then used to determine the saliency at each pixel of the scene. It was observed that through the inclusion of additional polarized states into the saliency analysis, we were able to compute noticeably improved saliency maps in scenes where objects are difficult to distinguish from their background due to color intensity similarities between the object and its surroundings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicVisual Attention and Saliency DetectionFrench-language works237,207