MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2288008451 · doi:10.1115/detc2015-47760

Designing Projection Patterns for 3D Structured-Light Sensors

2015· article· en· W2288008451 on OpenAlexaff
Veronica E. Marin, Goldie Nejat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructured lightStructured-light 3D scannerComputer scienceProjection (relational algebra)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceProfiling (computer programming)Projection methodObject (grammar)Noise (video)Dykstra's projection algorithmAlgorithmImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structured-light (SL) sensing techniques have been emerging as a popular non-contact optical method for 3D surface profiling of complex objects in manufacturing inspection applications. The measured object is illuminated with sinusoidal phase-shifted projection patterns that are deformed based on the 3D surface profile of the object. To-date, no methodology exists to determine the number of multiple fringe patterns needed in order to improve the measurement accuracy of an SL sensory system. In this paper, we present a novel design methodology that encompasses a detailed procedure for designing the projection patterns in order to minimize system noise and provide accurate 3D measurements. Experiments are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed methodology.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207