MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012681820 · doi:10.1109/robio.2011.6181701

One-to-one feature matching with inaccurate maps

2011· article· en· W2012681820 on OpenAlexaff
Chatavut Viriyasuthee, Gregory Dudek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Set (abstract data type)Relaxation (psychology)Range (aeronautics)Process (computing)Pattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmBlossom algorithmComputer visionMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the problems of localization using inaccurate maps, navigation agents have to match available information from sensors to maps in order to find their locations. A map contains a set of constraints that can be expressed in the form of a graphical model that matching algorithm has to satisfy. There are two generally categories of constraints: absolute and relative. We propose a relaxation-based algorithm for the NP-hard problem of one-to-one feature matching with absolute and relative constraints. The algorithm is a combination between relaxation labeling and the Kuhn-Munkres method where the former is known for its highly parallel structure imitated the human visual process. To test the performance, we applied the algorithm in a robotics application where the objective is to match range scanner features to those in inaccurate template maps provided by humans. Our experiments show that the proposed algorithm can achieve qualified matching results in artificial and real situations.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.403

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207