MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129076533 · doi:10.1109/icpr.2006.588

Fundamental Matrix Estimation via TIP - Transfer of Invariant Parameters

2006· article· en· W2129076533 on OpenAlexaff
F. Riggi, Matthew Toews, Tal Arbel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvariant (physics)Affine transformationArtificial intelligenceMathematicsEstimation theoryComputer visionAlgorithmComputer scienceTranslation (biology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fundamental matrix (FM) represents the perspective transform between two or more uncalibrated images of a stationary scene, and is traditionally estimated based on 2-parameter point-to-point correspondences between image pairs. Recent invariant correspondence techniques however, provide robust correspondences in terms of 4 to 6-parameter invariant regions. Such correspondences contain important information regarding scene geometry, information which is lost in FM estimation techniques based solely on 2-parameter point translation. In this article, we present a method of incorporating this additional information into point-based FM estimation routines, entitled TIP (transfer of invariant parameters). The TIP method transforms invariant correspondence parameters into additional point correspondences, which can be used with FM estimation routines. Experimentation shows that the TIP methods result in more robust FM estimates in the case of sparse correspondence, and allows estimation based on as few as 3 correspondences in the case of affine-invariant features

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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
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

Citations17
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryFrench-language works237,207