MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000992950 · doi:10.1109/ictai.2012.57

Random Forests Based View Generation for Multiview TV

2012· article· en· W2000992950 on OpenAlexaff
Mahsa T. Pourazad, Di Xu, Panos Nasiopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsTelus (Canada)University of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDepth mapArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMonocularDepth perceptionView synthesisPipeline (software)2D to 3D conversionDepth of fieldBandwidth (computing)Random forestQuality (philosophy)Image (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The appearance of multiview display systems in the consumer market is not far from reality. With technical knowledge in this field constantly improving, production of multiview content is the only other key factor that will determine the successful adoption of this technology. Multiview content can be generated from two or three views and their associated depth maps. Estimating a high quality depth map is challenging. Moreover transmission of depth map information requires extra bandwidth. In this study, we propose an effective algorithm, which utilizes a 3D visual attention model, multiple monocular depth cues and a fraction of depth information for estimating the whole depth map of the scene using the Random Forests (RF) machine learning algorithm. Having the estimated depth maps and stereo videos, other views may be synthesized. Performance evaluations have shown that the proposed method estimates high quality depth maps for stereo sequences from limited depth information. Implementation of our proposed technique in the future multiview pipeline eliminates the need for estimating and transmitting the whole depth map for all the views, producing high quality multiview content while reducing the required bandwidth.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207