MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322138768 · doi:10.1115/detc2015-46484

A Novel Method of Normal Estimation for 3D Surface Reconstruction

2015· article· en· W2322138768 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaocui Yuan, Qingjin Peng, Lushen Wu, Huawei Chen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPoint cloudNormalFeature (linguistics)Cluster analysisPrincipal component analysisArtificial intelligenceGaussianPattern recognition (psychology)IsotropyComputer sciencePoint (geometry)Surface (topology)Computer visionPlane (geometry)MathematicsAlgorithmGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 3D object can be recovered from scanned point data, which requires accurate estimating normal directions of the object surface from the cloud data. Many point cloud processing algorithms rely on the accurate normal as input to generate an accurate 3D surface model. The neighborhood of a data point in its smooth region can be well approximated by a plane. However, the neighborhood of a feature point employed for the normal estimation is isotropic which would enclose points belonging to different surface patches across the sharp feature. In this paper, isotropic neighborhoods are segmented to search anisotropic neighborhoods for the accurate normal estimation. Normals and candidate feature points are first estimated by the principal component analysis (PCA) method. Neighborhoods of the feature point are then mapped into a Gaussian image. A k-means clustering algorithm is then used for the Gaussian image to identify an anisotropic sub-neighborhood for the data point. The normal of the candidate feature point is finally estimated by the anisotropic neighborhood with the PCA method. The proposed method can accurately estimate normal directions while preserving sharp features of the object surface. Applications have demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed method.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207