MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091897342 · doi:10.1145/1029949.1029956

Visualizing 3D scenes using non-linear projections and data mining of previous camera movements

2004· article· en· W2091897342 on OpenAlexaff
Karan Singh, Ravin Balakrishnan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePerspective (graphical)GeneralityComputer visionProjection (relational algebra)Artificial intelligenceVisualizationFlexibility (engineering)Computer graphics (images)SubdivisionLinear modelAlgorithmMathematicsMachine learningGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe techniques for exploring 3D scenes by combining non-linear projections with the interactive data mining of camera navigations from previous explorations. Our approach is motivated by two key observations: First, that there is a wealth of information in prior explorations of a scene that can assist in future presentations of the same scene. Second, current linear perspective camera models produce images that are too limited to adequately capture the complexity of many 3D scenes. The contributions of this paper are two-fold. First, we show how spatial and temporal subdivision schemes can be used to store camera navigation information that is data mined and clustered to be interactively applicable to a number of existing techniques. Second, we show how the movement of a traditional linear perspective camera is closely tied to non-linear projections that combine space and time. As a result, we present a coherent system where the navigation of a conventional camera is data mined to provide both the understandability of linear perspective and the flexibility of non-linear projection of a 3D scene in real-time. Our system's generality is illustrated by three visualization techniques built with a single data mining and projection infrastructure.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207