MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103985517 · doi:10.1109/cvpr.1989.37877

The fast computation of disparity from phase differences

2003· article· en· W2103985517 on OpenAlexaff
Allan D. Jepson, Michael Jenkin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell Image Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Computer scienceComputationAlgorithmPhase (matter)Nonlinear systemStereopsisPoint (geometry)Image (mathematics)Simple (philosophy)Artificial intelligenceDifferential (mechanical device)Computer visionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous work has demonstrated that the task of recovering local disparity measurements can be reduced to the task of measuring the local phase between bandpass signals extracted from the left and right cameras. In computing this local phase difference, earlier algorithms expressed the computational task as a nonlinear differential equation to be solved at each image point. Although this approach has great appeal as a model for biological disparity measurement, the solving of a differential equation at a large number of image points and disparities makes the algorithm unsuitable for serial digital computer applications. Here, the authors demonstrate how the approach of recovering disparity from the measurement of local phase differences can be accomplished without the computational expense exhibited by previous algorithms. This disparity measurement technique is embedded within a simple coarse-to-fine stereopsis similar to the algorithm proposed by H.K. Nishihara (1984) and the resulting algorithm is applied to a number of stereo pairs.>

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)0.002
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations58
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCell Image Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207