MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF A LOW-COST TRIANGULATION-BASED 3D CAMERA: MICROSOFT KINECT SYSTEM

2012· article· en· W2054308421 on OpenAlexafffund
Jacky Chow, K. D. Ang, Derek D. Lichti, W. F. Teskey

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligencePhotogrammetryTriangulationComputer sciencePoint cloudCamera resectioningComputer graphics (images)Orientation (vector space)CalibrationRoboticsGeographyRobotMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Recent technological advancements have made active imaging sensors popular for 3D modelling and motion tracking. The 3D coordinates of signalised targets are traditionally estimated by matching conjugate points in overlapping images. Current 3D cameras can acquire point clouds at video frame rates from a single exposure station. In the area of 3D cameras, Microsoft and PrimeSense have collaborated and developed an active 3D camera based on the triangulation principle, known as the Kinect system. This off-the-shelf system costs less than $150 USD and has drawn a lot of attention from the robotics, computer vision, and photogrammetry disciplines. In this paper, the prospect of using the Kinect system for precise engineering applications was evaluated. The geometric quality of the Kinect system as a function of the scene (i.e. variation of depth, ambient light conditions, incidence angle, and object reflectivity) and the sensor (i.e. warm-up time and distance averaging) were analysed quantitatively. This system's potential in human body measurements was tested against a laser scanner and 3D range camera. A new calibration model for simultaneously determining the exterior orientation parameters, interior orientation parameters, boresight angles, leverarm, and object space features parameters was developed and the effectiveness of this calibration approach was explored.

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)0.002
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations43
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207