MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103200857 · doi:10.1109/icip.2004.1421744

An energy-basfd framework using global spatial constraints for the stereo correspondence problem

2005· article· en· W2103200857 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre‐Marc Jodoin, Max Mignotte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRegularization (linguistics)Artificial intelligencePixelGround truthGlobal optimizationClassification of discontinuitiesAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the use of a region-based approach for the stereo matching problem. We have stated this problem in a commonly adopted global energy-based framework. Our energy-based model mixes a local and robust regularization term with global spatial constraints. These constraints are related to a (precomputed) partition into homogeneous regions with identical disparity. In practice, our approach assigns a single disparity to regions instead of individual pixels. These regions, used to globally constrain the ill-posed nature of our minimization problem, are estimated by combining an unsupervised Markovian segmentation and a roughly estimated disparity map. This disparity map is computed with a basic winner-take-all (WTA) procedure. The proposed global energy function seems to be well suited to find good disparity discontinuities at object boundaries, especially when the number of disparities is large. An iterated conditional modes (ICM) algorithm is used to optimize this global energy function. We provide experimental results on real stereo image pairs. A quality measure, based on ground truth data, is used to evaluate the performance of our algorithm. Results indicate that our approach is fast and performs well compared to other existing methods.

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 score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.367

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207