MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992363158 · doi:10.1109/mcg.2004.1318815

Detailed 3D reconstruction of large-scale heritage sites with integrated techniques

2004· article· en· W1992363158 on OpenAlexaff
Sabry F. El-Hakim, J.‐A. Beraldin, M.-J. Picard, Guy Godin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Computer Graphics and Applications · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)DigitizationDocumentationCultural heritageComputer graphics (images)3D modelingVisualizationVirtual realityComputer graphicsSoftwareContext (archaeology)Image-based modeling and renderingLaser scanningArtificial intelligenceComputer visionArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many cultural heritage applications require 3D reconstruction of real-world objects and scenes. Over the past few years, it has become increasingly common to use 3D digitization and modeling for this purpose. This is mainly due to advances in laser-scanning techniques, 3D modeling software, image-based modeling techniques, computer power, and virtual reality. Our approach integrates several technologies based on our experience over more than a decade of trying to accurately and completely model large-scale heritage monuments and sites. Using both interactive and automatic techniques, we can model a highly detailed structure or site at various levels of detail. We use image-based modeling for basic shape and structural elements, and laser scanning for fine details and sculpted surfaces. To present the site in its proper context, we use image-based rendering for landscapes and surroundings. To apply this approach, we created hundreds of models from sites all over the world for documentation, walk-through movies, and interactive visualization. The results were compelling and encouraging.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations244
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Computer Graphics and ApplicationsSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207