MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168735438 · doi:10.1109/crv.2006.53

Object Extraction and Reconstruction in Active Video

2006· article· en· W2168735438 on OpenAlexaff
Ye Lü, Ze-Nian Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceObject (grammar)Gestalt psychologyVideo tracking3D single-object recognitionCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionMotion (physics)Block-matching algorithmMethodObject-oriented programmingPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method of video object extraction is proposed to accurately obtain the object of interest from actively acquired videos. Traditional video object extraction techniques often operate under the assumption of homogeneous object motion and extract various parts of the video that are motion consistent as objects. In contrast, the proposed active video object extraction (AVOE) paradigm assumes that the object of interest is being actively tracked by a non-calibrated camera under general motion and classifies the possible movements of the camera that result in the 2D motion patterns as recovered from the image sequence. Consequently, the AVOE method is able to extract the single object of interest from the active video. We formalize the AVOE process using notions from Gestalt psychology. We define a new Gestalt factor called "shift and hold" and present 2D object extraction algorithms. Moreover, since an active video sequence naturally contains multiple views of the object of interest, we demonstrate that these views can be combined to form a single 3D object regardless of whether the object is static or moving in the video.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Analysis and SummarizationFrench-language works237,207