Acquiring 3D indoor environments with variability and repetition
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large-scale acquisition of exterior urban environments is by now a well-established technology, supporting many applications in search, navigation, and commerce. The same is, however, not the case for indoor environments, where access is often restricted and the spaces are cluttered. Further, such environments typically contain a high density of repeated objects (e.g., tables, chairs, monitors, etc.) in regular or non-regular arrangements with significant pose variations and articulations. In this paper, we exploit the special structure of indoor environments to accelerate their 3D acquisition and recognition with a low-end handheld scanner. Our approach runs in two phases: (i) a learning phase wherein we acquire 3D models of frequently occurring objects and capture their variability modes from only a few scans, and (ii) a recognition phase wherein from a single scan of a new area, we identify previously seen objects but in different poses and locations at an average recognition time of 200ms/model. We evaluate the robustness and limits of the proposed recognition system using a range of synthetic and real world scans under challenging settings.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it