MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2540761561 · doi:10.1038/srep35805

The Southampton-York Natural Scenes (SYNS) dataset: Statistics of surface attitude

2016· article· en· W2540761561 on OpenAlexaff
Wendy J. Adams, James H. Elder, Erich W. Graf, Julian Leyland, Arthur J. Lugtigheid, Alexander Muryy

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsPanoramaScene statisticsRange (aeronautics)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceHorizonLidarSurface (topology)Computer visionTilt (camera)Scale (ratio)Orientation (vector space)Elevation (ballistics)StatisticsGeographyMathematicsRemote sensingCartographyGeometryPsychologyPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recovering 3D scenes from 2D images is an under-constrained task; optimal estimation depends upon knowledge of the underlying scene statistics. Here we introduce the Southampton-York Natural Scenes dataset (SYNS: https://syns.soton.ac.uk), which provides comprehensive scene statistics useful for understanding biological vision and for improving machine vision systems. In order to capture the diversity of environments that humans encounter, scenes were surveyed at random locations within 25 indoor and outdoor categories. Each survey includes (i) spherical LiDAR range data (ii) high-dynamic range spherical imagery and (iii) a panorama of stereo image pairs. We envisage many uses for the dataset and present one example: an analysis of surface attitude statistics, conditioned on scene category and viewing elevation. Surface normals were estimated using a novel adaptive scale selection algorithm. Across categories, surface attitude below the horizon is dominated by the ground plane (0° tilt). Near the horizon, probability density is elevated at 90°/270° tilt due to vertical surfaces (trees, walls). Above the horizon, probability density is elevated near 0° slant due to overhead structure such as ceilings and leaf canopies. These structural regularities represent potentially useful prior assumptions for human and machine observers, and may predict human biases in perceived surface attitude.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.016

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations95
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207