MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131154433 · doi:10.1109/iswc.2002.1167222

Mediated reality using computer graphics hardware for computer vision

2003· article· en· W2131154433 on OpenAlexaff
James Fung, Felix Tang, S. Mann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer graphicsWearable computerComputer visionComputer graphics (images)Augmented realityArtificial intelligenceReal-time computer graphicsGraphicsGraphics hardwareTracking (education)Projection (relational algebra)3D computer graphicsEmbedded systemAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wearable, camera based, head-tracking systems use spatial image registration algorithms to align images taken as the wearer gazes around their environment. This allows for computer-generated information to appear to the user as though it was anchored in the real world. Often, these algorithms require creation of a multiscale Gaussian pyramid or repetitive re-projection of the images. Such operations, however can be computationally expensive, and such head-tracking algorithms are desired to run in real-time on a body borne computer In this paper we present a method of using the 3D computer graphics hardware that is available in a typical wearable computer to accelerate the repetitive image projections required in many computer vision algorithms. We apply this "graphics for vision" technique to a wearable camera based head-tracking algorithm, implemented on a wearable computer with 3D graphics hardware. We perform an analysis of the acceleration achieved by applying graphics hardware to computer vision to create a Mediated Reality.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations39
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207