CSCA-based expectivity indices for LIDAR computer vision
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuum-Shape Constraint Analysis (CSCA) is a shape analysis approach applicable to pose estimation tasks in computer vision. A variety of useful measures (indices) which predict the accuracy of pose estimation can be derived from CSCA. Conceived for computer-vision assisted spacecraft rendezvous analysis, the approach was developed for blanket or localized scanning by LIDAR or similar range-finding scanner that samples non-specific points from the object across the area observed from a single view. The application problem addressed in this paper is the question of what view of an object can be expected to lead to the lowest pose estimation error computed via the Iterative Closest-Point Algorithm (ICP), or conversely, what level of error can be expected for a particular scan view. Based on CSCA, different forms of indices are developed for this purpose and demonstrated in both numerical and experimental studies using the Stanford Bunny and a cuboid shape. The continuum nature of the CSCA formulation produces metrics, including the Expectivity Index, that are pure shape properties an object.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it