MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547139274 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2016.7726834

Toward study of features associated with natural sleep posture using a depth sensor

2016· article· en· W2547139274 on OpenAlexaff
Xuhong Liu, Shahram Payandeh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Surveillance and Tracking Methods
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTorsoPolygon meshArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPlane (geometry)Computer scienceHorizontal planeNormalSTRIPSFeature (linguistics)Transformation (genetics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Surface (topology)GeologyGeometryMathematicsGeodesyComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimating the sleeping posture of a person under natural resting environment is a very complex problem. In this study, a new non-invasive framework is proposed for exploring features defining sleep postures of a person. Three dimensional depth scans as well as the cross-sectional scans of the static sleeping body are developed using the measured depth data. These features can then be used in order to estimate the changes in patterns associated with the head, limbs and torso position in depth images. Scans of the sleeping postures are taken at various cross sectional directions. 1D and 2D Fast Fourier Transformation are explored in order to provide complementary feature of the scans. We also generate grids on the horizontal sleeping plane. In the depth image, each grid has a quadrangle configuration which can further be divided into two triangular meshes. We calculated a surface normal vector to each of the mesh. Given a 2D scan strip perpendicular for the sleeping plane, variations of the normal along such scan strips can be used as other local features. These selected features can be further integrated as a part of natural sleep posture estimation methods.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Surveillance and Tracking MethodsFrench-language works237,207