MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992204148 · doi:10.1115/1.1876492

Total Least-Squares Methods for Active View Registration of Three-Dimensional Line Laser Scanning Data

2004· article· en· W1992204148 on OpenAlexaff
Fengfeng Xi, Dennis Nancoo, George K. Knopf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistical and numerical algorithms
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaser scanningLeast-squares function approximationTransformation (genetics)Position (finance)Line (geometry)Point cloudTotal least squaresAlgorithmPoint (geometry)Computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceLaserStatisticsOpticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper a method is proposed to register three-dimensional line laser scanning data acquired in two different viewpoints. The proposed method is based on three-point position measurement by scanning three reference balls to determine the transformation between two views. Since there are errors in laser scanning data and sphere fitting, the two sets of three-point position measurement data at two different views are both subject to errors. For this reason, total least-squares methods are applied to determine the transformation, because they take into consideration the errors both at inputs and outputs. Simulations and experiment are carried to compare three methods, namely, ordinary least-squares method, unconstrained total least-squares method, and constrained total least-squares method. It is found that the last method gives the most accurate results.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicStatistical and numerical algorithmsFrench-language works237,207