MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119183988 · doi:10.1109/crv.2008.44

Development of Continuum Shape Constraint Analysis (CSCA) for Computer Vision Applications Using Range Data

2008· article· en· W2119183988 on OpenAlexaff
G. Okouneva, D. J. McTavish, M. Gillespie, John Enright

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstraint (computer-aided design)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceFeature (linguistics)Mathematical optimizationPattern recognition (psychology)Data miningComputer visionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper further presents continuum shape constraint analysis (CSCA) of surfaces. CSCA is a generalization of discrete-point based constraint analysis which can be used to predict performance of registration algorithms. A surface-based self-registration cost function to which constraint analysis can be applied is introduced. This cost function takes into account a direction the object is viewed at. A sample study is provided to illustrate this approach applied to the problem of pose estimation using range-data taken from a scanning instrument such as LIDAR. Specifically, CSCA is used to assess an object feature for suitability for local LIDAR scanning and subsequent application of the ICP (iterative closest-point) algorithm to determine pose. In this study, the constraint analysis uses noise amplification index (NAI) as an output measure. The continuum nature of the CSCA approach renders the registration cost matrix and the derived NAI as pure shape properties of the feature with a dependence on viewpoint.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207