Study of the performance of stereoscopic panomorph systems calibrated with traditional pinhole model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With their large field of view, anamorphosis, and areas of enhanced magnification, panomorph lenses are an interesting choice for navigation systems for mobile robotics in which knowledge of the surroundings is mandatory. However, panomorph lenses special characteristics can be challenging during the calibration process. This study focuses on the calibration of two panomorph stereoscopic systems with a model and technique developed for narrow-angle lenses, the “Camera Calibration Toolbox for MATLAB.” In order to assess the performance of the systems, the mean reprojection error (MRE) related to the calibration and the reconstruction error of control points of an object of interest at various locations in the field of view are used. The calibrations were successful and exhibit MREs of less than one pixel in all cases. However, some poorly reconstructed control points illustrate that an acceptable MRE guarantees neither the quality of 3-D reconstruction nor its uniformity in the field of view. In addition, the nonuniformity in the 3-D reconstruction quality indicates that panomorph lenses require a more accurate estimation of the principal point (center of distortion) coordinates to improve the calibration and therefore the 3-D reconstruction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".