MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134815056 · doi:10.1109/icsmc.1991.169661

Constraints on quadratic curves under perspective projection

2002· article· en· W2134815056 on OpenAlexaff
R. Safaee‐Rad, K.C. Smith, B. Benhabib, I. Tchoukanov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuadratic equationProjection (relational algebra)Orientation (vector space)Position (finance)Context (archaeology)Rotation (mathematics)MathematicsTransformation (genetics)A priori and a posterioriFeature (linguistics)Quadratic programmingComputer scienceGeometryAlgorithmMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors address the problem of three-dimensional (3-D) location estimation based on quadratic-curved features. They derive the mathematical relations or constraints on the 3-D position and orientation of quadratic-curved features using the standard rotation and the standard transformation concepts introduced by K.I. Kanatani, (1988), and assuming that the true size and shape of a given quadratic feature are known a priori, with its projection image given. In this context, an analytical method is introduced for estimation of the standard rotation and determination of the shape of a quadratic-curved feature at its canonical position. It is shown that, in general, knowledge of the true shape and size of a quadratic-curved feature does not yield a sufficient number of constraints to determine the 3-D position and orientation uniquely. As a result, extra constraints must be acquired from various sources of information and fused with these constraints to obtain unique 3-D position and orientation estimates.>

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207