MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Globally Consistent Space‐Time Reconstruction

2010· article· en· W1988179100 on OpenAlexaff
T. Popa, I. South‐Dickinson, Derek Bradley, Alla Sheffer, Wolfgang Heidrich

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSequence (biology)Computer scienceComputer visionAdjacency listGeometryProcess (computing)Artificial intelligenceMotion (physics)Object (grammar)Space (punctuation)Surface reconstructionAlgorithmComputer graphics (images)Topology (electrical circuits)Surface (topology)MathematicsCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Most objects deform gradually over time, without abrupt changes in geometry or topology, such as changes in genus. Correct space‐time reconstruction of such objects should satisfy this gradual change prior. This requirement necessitates a globally consistent interpretation of spatial adjacency. Consider the capture of a surface that comes in contact with itself during the deformation process, such as a hand with different fingers touching one another in parts of the sequence. Naive reconstruction would glue the contact regions together for the duration of each contact and keep them apart in other parts of the sequence. However such reconstruction violates the gradual change prior as it enforces a drastic intrinsic change in the object's geometry at the transition between the glued and unglued sub‐sequences. Instead consistent global reconstruction should keep the surfaces separate throughout the entire sequence. We introduce a new method for globally consistent space‐time geometry and motion reconstruction from video capture. We use the gradual change prior to resolve inconsistencies and faithfully reconstruct the geometry and motion of the scanned objects. In contrast to most previous methods our algorithm doesn't require a strong shape prior such as a template and provides better results than other template‐free approaches.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations46
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207