MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561001488 · doi:10.1109/crv.2016.70

KinectScenes: Robust Real-Time RGB-D Fusion for Animal Behavioural Monitoring

2016· article· en· W2561001488 on OpenAlexaff
Logan Jeya, John Zelek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRGB color modelComputer visionArtificial intelligencePoint cloudPipeline (software)Tracking (education)Video trackingSensor fusionReal-time computingComputer graphics (images)Object (grammar)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animal Behavioural Monitoring requires near real-time and robust scene information. State of art methods to construct a complete RGB-D video of a scene are typically slow, or done offline and often both computationally and monetarily expensive. In this paper, we present a near real-time method called KinectScenes that fuses N RGB-D point clouds acquired from statically positioned commodity hardware to reconstruct large & complete dynamic 3D scenes. Specifically, we introduce a pipeline that fuses RGB-D sensor data to generate a spatio-temporal coherent 3D free viewpoint video with near 360° purview -- only limited by the number and placement of the sensors. KinectScenes differentiates from existing state of art in that 1. It is near real-time: 7~15 fps, and 2. It remains unperturbed to minute motion of the static sensors. In addition, we contribute a new dataset of RGB-D scenes to the research community as to enable rapid progress for behavioral tracking research. Applications include precise human and animal behavioral tracking, inexpensive VR scene generation, object recognition and interaction. Early results demonstrate that KinectScenes is both efficient in near real-time and can densely and richly reconstruct a given dynamic scene using 3 sensors.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.349

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207