MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060603293 · doi:10.1117/12.698163

Spatiotemporal power spectra of motion parallax: the case of cluttered 3D scenes

2007· article· en· W2060603293 on OpenAlexaff
Derek Rivait, Michael Langer

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParallaxComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceParameterized complexitySpectral densityObserver (physics)PhysicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the spatiotemporal power spectra of image sequences that depict dense motion parallax, namely the parallax seen by an observer moving laterally in a cluttered 3D scene. Previous models of the spatiotemporal power have accounted for effects such as a static 1/f spectrum in each image frame, a spreading of power at high spatial frequencies in the direction of motion, and a bias toward either lower or higher image speeds depending on the 3D density of objects the scene. Here we use computer graphics to generate a parameterized set of image sequences and qualitatively verify the main features of these models. The novel contribution is to discuss how failures of 1/f scaling can occur in cluttered scenes. Such failures have been described for the spatial case, but not for the spatiotemporal case. We find that when objects in the cluttered scene are visible over a wide range of depths, and when the image size of objects is smaller than the image width, failures of 1/f scaling tend to occur at certain critical frequencies, defined by a correspondence between object size and object speed.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207