MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078443840 · doi:10.4018/jcini.2008100101

Modeling Underwater Structures

2008· article· en· W2078443840 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Jenkin, Andrew Hogue, Andrew German, Sunbir Gill, Anna Topol, Stephanie Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural Intelligence · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceUnderwaterConstruct (python library)Artificial intelligenceRepresentation (politics)Inertial measurement unitInertial frame of referenceComputer visionReal-time computingHuman–computer interactionGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For systems to become truly autonomous it is necessary that they be able to interact with complex real-world environments. In this article we investigate techniques and technologies to address the problem of the acquisition and representation of complex environments such as those found underwater. The underwater environment presents many challenges for robotic sensing including highly variable lighting and the presence of dynamic objects such as fish and suspended particulate matter. The dynamic six-degree-of-freedom nature of the environment presents further challenges due to unpredictable external forces such as current and surge. In order to address the complexities of the underwater environment we have developed a stereo vision-inertial sensing device that has been successfully deployed to reconstruct complex 3-D structures in both the aquatic and terrestrial domains. The sensor combines 3-D information, obtained using stereo vision, with 3DOF inertial data to construct 3-D models of the environment. Semiautomatic tools have been developed to aid in the conversion of these representations into semantically relevant primitives suitable for later processing. Reconstruction and segmentation of underwater structures obtained with the sensor are presented.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Cognitive Informatics and Natural IntelligenceSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207