MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073612273 · doi:10.1117/12.2076304

Depth-map and albedo estimation with superior information-theoretic performance

2015· article· en· W2073612273 on OpenAlexafffund
Adam P. Harrison, Dileepan Joseph

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceEstimationAlbedo (alchemy)Artificial intelligenceRemote sensingGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lambertian photometric stereo (PS) is a seminal computer vision method. However, using depth maps in the image formation model, instead of surface normals as in PS, reduces model parameters by a third, making it preferred from an information-theoretic perspective. The Akaike information criterion (AIC) quantifies this trade-off between goodness of fit and overfitting. Obtaining superior AIC values requires an effective maximum likelihood (ML) depth-map & albedo estimation method. Recently, the authors published an ML estimation method that uses a two-step approach based on PS. While effective, approximations of noise distributions and decoupling of depth-map & albedo estimation have limited its accuracy. Overcoming these limitations, this paper presents an ML method operating directly on images. The previous two-step ML method provides a robust initial solution, which kick starts a new nonlinear estimation process. An innovative formulation of the estimation task, including a separable nonlinear least-squares approach, reduces the computational burden of the optimization process. Experiments demonstrate visual improvements under noisy conditions by avoiding overfitting. As well, a comprehensive analysis shows that refined depth maps & albedos produce superior AIC metrics and enjoy better predictive accuracy than with literature methods. The results indicate that the new method is a promising means for depth-map & albedo estimation with superior information-theoretic performance.

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)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryFrench-language works237,207