MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153775233 · doi:10.1109/icdsc.2009.5289362

Unsupervised camera network structure estimation based on activity

2009· article· en· W2153775233 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre Clarot, Erhan Baki Ermiş, Pierre‐Marc Jodoin, Venkatesh Saligrama

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceZoomHomographyComputer visionMatching (statistics)CalibrationScalabilityUnsupervised learningSimilarity (geometry)SegmentationDistance matrixFundamental matrix (linear differential equation)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)MathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we consider the problem of unsupervised topology reconstruction in uncalibrated visual sensor networks. We assume that a number of video cameras observe a common scene from arbitrary and unknown locations, orientations and zoom levels, and show that the extrinsic and calibration matrices, fundamental and essential matrices, the homography matrix, and the physical configuration of the cameras with respect to each other can be estimated in an unsupervised manner. Our method relies on the similarity of activity patterns observed at various locations, and an unsupervised matching method based on these activity patterns. The proposed method works in cases with cameras having significantly different orientations and zoom levels, where many of the existing methods cannot be applied. We explain how to extend the method to a multicamera case where more than two cameras are involved. We present both qualitative and quantitative results of our estimates, and conclude that this method can be applied in wide area surveillance applications in which the deployed systems need to be flexible and scalable, and where calibration can be a major challenge.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.266 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207