MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164116870 · doi:10.1109/pacrim.1989.48363

Morphological skeleton transforms for determining position and orientation of pre-marked objects

2003· article· en· W2164116870 on OpenAlexaff
Ziheng Zhou, K.C. Smith, B. Benhabib, R. Safaee‐Rad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Image Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEllipseArtificial intelligenceSkeleton (computer programming)Position (finance)Computer visionOrientation (vector space)Perspective (graphical)Object (grammar)Scheme (mathematics)Computer scienceSurface (topology)Image (mathematics)Euclidean geometryPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsGeometryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The feasibility of a pre-marking scheme for three-dimensional object recognition is demonstrated. The proposed scheme is based on the assumption that an object can be modeled by a small number of its distinct two-dimensional perspective projections. Circular markers are used to identify these views by determining their surface normals passing through their centers. The surface normal of the marker can be determined by analyzing the geometrical features of its acquired pseudo-ellipse image using morphological skeleton transforms. The position of the marker, on the other hand, has to be determined by acquiring two images from different viewing angles. The experimental results illustrate that the specific pseudo-Euclidean skeleton transform used can accurately determine the features of the ellipse to allow the successful application of the proposed pre-marking scheme.>

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Image Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207