MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111701062 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2010.5575238

A novel technique for estimating intrinsic camera parameters in geometric camera calibration

2010· article· en· W2111701062 on OpenAlexaff
P. Swapna, Nicholas Krouglicof, Raymond G. Gosine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCamera auto-calibrationComputer visionArtificial intelligenceCamera resectioningCalibrationComputer scienceDistortion (music)Lens (geology)Set (abstract data type)Frame (networking)Focal lengthCamera lensPinhole camera modelMachine visionProcess (computing)Orientation (vector space)Position (finance)MathematicsOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the field of machine vision, camera calibration refers to the experimental determination of a set of parameters which describe the image formation process for a given analytical model of the machine vision system. A complete set of calibration parameters includes both the intrinsic parameters that describe the lens-camera-frame grabber combination as well as the extrinsic parameters that relate the position and orientation of the camera to a fixed reference frame. In this paper, a new approach towards camera calibration is proposed in which the image center and focal length are calculated independently of the lens distortion. A practical experiment was conducted to validate this study. The experimental results show that this technique has the potential to improve calibration accuracy. The paper also compares the results obtained using the new technique and those obtained by applying the systematic camera calibration algorithm proposed by Heikkila using the same experimental set up.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.453
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207