MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131358543 · doi:10.1109/crv.2012.34

Optical Flow at Occlusion

2012· article· en· W2131358543 on OpenAlexafffund
Jieyu Zhang, John A. Barron

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOptical flowBoundary (topology)Flow (mathematics)OcclusionSmoothnessPixelConstraint (computer-aided design)Lagrange multiplierMathematicsComputer visionAlgorithmSequence (biology)Computer scienceImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceGeometryMathematical optimizationMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We implement and quantitatively/qualitatively evaluate two optical flow methods that model occlusion. The Yuan et al. method [1] improves on the Horn and Schunck optical flow method at occlusion boundaries by using a dynamic coefficient (the Lagrange multiplier α) at each pixel that weighs the smoothness constraint relative to the optical flow constraint, by adopting a modified scheme to calculate average velocities and by using a “compensating” iterative algorithm to achieve higher computational efficiency. The Niu et al. method [2] is based on a modified version of the Lucas and Kanade optical flow method, that selects local intensity neighbourhoods, spatially and temporally, based on pixels that are on different sides of an occlusion boundary and then corrects any erroneous flow computed at occlusion boundaries. We present quantitative results for sinusoidal sequence with a known occlusion boundary. We also present qualitative evaluation of the methods on the Hamburg Taxi sequence and and the Trees sequence.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.855
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.265 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207