MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148502089 · doi:10.1109/im.2003.1240257

Recursive model optimization using ICP and free moving 3D data acquisition

2004· article· en· W2148502089 on OpenAlexaff
F. Blais, Michel Picard, Guy Godin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceComputer visionPosition (finance)Artificial intelligenceObject (grammar)Tracking (education)Range (aeronautics)Image resolutionResolution (logic)Object detectionAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a recursive multiresolution algorithm that reconstructs high-resolution and high-accuracy 3D images from low-resolution sparse range images or profiles. The method starts by creating a rough, partial, and potentially distorted estimate of the model of the object from an initial subset of sparse range data; then, using ICP algorithms, it recursively improves and refines the model by adding new range information. In parallel, real-time tracking of the object is performed in order to allow the laser scan to be automatically centered on the object. The end result is the creation of a high-resolution and accurate 3D model of a free-floating object, and real-time tracking of its position. Examples of the method are presented when the object and the 3D camera are moving freely with respect to each other. The system provides high accuracy hand-held laser scanning that does not require complex and costly mechanical scanning apparatus or external positioning devices.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations30
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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