MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2147723128 · doi:10.1109/crv.2008.19

Camera Self-Calibration and Three Dimensional Reconstruction under Quasi-Perspective Projection

2008· article· en· W2147723128 on OpenAlexaff
Guanghui Wang, Q. M. Jonathan Wu, Wei Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCamera auto-calibrationComputer visionCamera resectioningArtificial intelligenceCamera matrixPerspective (graphical)Computer sciencePinhole camera modelProjection (relational algebra)Affine transformationFocal lengthMetric (unit)Iterative reconstructionCalibrationStructure from motionAlgorithmMathematicsMotion (physics)GeometryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of camera self-calibration and Euclidean reconstruction from image sequences is addressed in the paper. We propose a quasi-perspective projection model and apply the model to structure and motion factorization to estimate the focal lengths of the cameras. Then we optimize the camera parameters based on Kruppa constraints and recover the metric structure from factorization of the normalized tracking matrix. The novelty and contribution of the paper lies in two aspects. First, under the assumption that the camera is far away from the object with small rotations, we propose that the imaging process can be modeled by quasi-perspective projection. The model is more accurate than affine camera model since the projective depths are implicitly embedded. Second, we propose to calibrate a more general camera model with 5 intrinsic parameters, while previous factorization algorithm can only calibrate the focal lengths. We validate and evaluate the proposed method on many synthetic and real image sequences and show the improvements over existing solutions.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207