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 OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.118
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