MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2595974524 · doi:10.15353/vsnl.v2i1.96

Depth from Defocus via Active Quasi-random Point Projections

2016· article· en· W2595974524 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Avery Ma, Francis Li, Alexander Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging Systems · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicImage Processing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsProjectorComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Projection (relational algebra)Computer visionRandom projectionArtificial intelligencePoint (geometry)InferenceCompressed sensingCalibrationAlgorithmMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depth sensing has many practical applications in vision-relatedtasks. While many different depth measurement techniques existand depth camera technologies are constantly being advanced, activedepth sensing still rely on specialized hardware that are highlycomplex and costly. Motivated by this, we present a novel techniquefor inferring depth measurements via depth from defocus usingactive quasi-random point projection patterns. A quasi-randompoint projection pattern is projected onto the scene of interest, andeach projection point in the image captured by a camera is analysedusing a calibration model to estimate the depth at that point.The proposed method has a relatively simple setup, consisting of acamera and a projector, and enables depth inference from a singlecapture. Furthermore, the use of a quasi-random projection patterncan allow us to leverage compressive sensing theory to producefull depth maps in future applications. Experimental resultsshow the proposed system has strong potential for enabling activedepth sensing in a simple, efficient manner.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging SystemsSame topicImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207