MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127397841 · doi:10.1109/icpr.1994.576270

Surface profile description: reliable geometric primitive extraction

2002· article· en· W2127397841 on OpenAlexaff
P. Hébert, Denis Laurendeau, D. Poussart

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConic sectionSpurious relationshipSampling (signal processing)Range (aeronautics)PolynomialComputer scienceObservational errorSurface (topology)Position (finance)Object (grammar)Set (abstract data type)AlgorithmStability (learning theory)Process (computing)Reliability (semiconductor)EllipseMathematicsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionGeometryStatisticsMathematical analysisPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is concerned with the reliability of a shape description recovered from a set of scattered measurements. The recovering process of the description should not introduce a bias that is caused by specific acquisition conditions such as the presence of spurious measurements and the relative position of the sensor with respect to the object. Moreover, the recovered description should be stable for a sampling variation. While the fitting stage is based on a measurement error model which takes into account the sensor's viewpoint, the stability with sampling is tested by perturbing an hypothesized section. The validity of the approach is demonstrated by extracting reliable estimates of polynomial sections (lines, conics) from surface profile range data obtained from one or several viewpoints.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.272
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207