MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122256465 · doi:10.1109/crv.2005.13

An Attentional Framework for Stereo Vision

2005· article· en· W2122256465 on OpenAlexaff
Neil D. B. Bruce, John K. Tsotsos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVisual perception and processing mechanisms
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBinocular rivalryComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Artificial intelligenceSoftware deploymentDomain (mathematical analysis)StereopsisComputer visionVisual attentionBinocular visionStereo camerasArchitectureLoomingHuman–computer interactionVisual perceptionPerceptionCognitive psychologyPsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The necessity and utility of visual attention are discussed in the context of stereo vision in machines and primates. Specific problems that arise in this domain including binocular rivalry, and the deployment of attention in three-dimensional space are considered. Necessary conditions are outlined for achieving appropriate attentional behaviour in both the aforementioned domains. In this light, we outline classes of existing computational models of attention and discuss their applicability for realizing binocular attention. Finally, a stereo attention framework is presented by considering the tenets of an existing attentional architecture that extends naturally to the binocular domain, in conjunction with the connectivity of units involved in achieving stereo vision.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations52
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVisual perception and processing mechanismsFrench-language works237,207