MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064182365 · doi:10.1177/0278364914539404

Scan registration using segmented region growing NDT

2014· article· en· W2064182365 on OpenAlexaff
Arun Das, Steven L. Waslander

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Robotics Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNondestructive testingVoxelCluster analysisComputer scienceGaussianGaussian functionArtificial intelligencePoint spread functionAlgorithmComputer visionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Normal Distributions Transform (NDT) scan registration algorithm divides a point cloud using rectilinear voxel cells, then models the points within each cell as a set of Gaussian distributions. A nonlinear optimization is performed in order to register the scans, however the voxel-based approach results in ill-defined cost function derivatives as points cross cell boundaries. In this work, a Segmented Region Growing NDT (SRG-NDT) variant is proposed, which first removes the ground points from the scan, then uses natural features in the environment to generate Gaussian clusters for the NDT algorithm. The removal of the ground points is shown to significantly speed up the scan registration process with negligible effect on the registration accuracy. By clustering the remaining points, the SRG-NDT approach is able to model the environment with fewer Gaussian distributions compared with the voxel-based NDT methods, which allows for a smooth and continuous cost function that guarantees that the optimization will converge. Furthermore, the use of a relatively small number of Gaussian distributions allows for a significant improvement in run-time. Experiments in both urban and forested environments demonstrate that the SRG-NDT approach is able to achieve comparable accuracy to existing methods, but with an average decrease in computation time over ICP, G-ICP, and NDT, of 90.1%, 95.3%, and 94.5%, respectively.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations68
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe International Journal of Robotics ResearchSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207