MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990345222 · doi:10.1145/2366145.2366157

Acquiring 3D indoor environments with variability and repetition

2012· article· en· W1990345222 on OpenAlexaff
Young Min Kim, Niloy J. Mitra, Dong‐Ming Yan, Leonidas Guibas

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersSeventh Framework ProgrammeNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)ExploitScannerArtificial intelligenceMobile deviceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
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

Citations182
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207