MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034729391 · doi:10.1109/isspa.2012.6310598

Multiple depth cameras calibration and body volume reconstruction for gait analysis

2012· preprint· en· W2034729391 on OpenAlexaff
Edouard Auvinet, Jean Meunier, Franck Multon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual hullComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceCalibrationVolume (thermodynamics)Context (archaeology)3D reconstructionGaitIterative reconstructionComputer graphics (images)MathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last decade, gait analysis has become one of the most active research topics in biomedical research engineering partly due to recent development of sensors and signal processing devices and more recently depth cameras. The latters can provide real-time distance measurements of moving objects. In this context, we present a new way to reconstruct body volume in motion using multiple active cameras from the depth maps they provide. A first contribution of this paper is a new and simple external camera calibration method based on several plane intersections observed with a low-cost depth camera which is experimentally validated. A second contribution consists in a body volume reconstruction method based on visual hull that is adapted and enhanced with the use of depth information. Preliminary results based on simulations are presented and compared with classical visual hull reconstruction. These results show that as little as three low-cost depth cameras can recover a more accurate 3D body shape than twenty regular cameras.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
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

Citations46
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207