Comparing 2D image features on viewpoint independence using 3D anthropometric dataset
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the viewpoint-independence of image features in the classification of identities using multiple-view full-body images. A reliable vision system should be robust in classifying objects from images captured on novel viewpoints. To obtain a robust classifier, 3D models are collected for rendering training and testing images from various viewpoints. These images are then used for extracting features and building classifiers. In this work, we compute multiple view human-body images from a 3D anthropometry human body database. For each subject, a majority of the views are randomly selected to be included in the training dataset and the remaining views are used for testing. More specifically, we use histogram of oriented gradient (HOG) feature-based support vector machine (SVM) as the baseline to be compared with deep auto-encoders network and deep convolutional neural networks (CNN). Through experiments, we conclude that the deep CNN performs the best (deep auto-encoders network as the runner-up) in computing viewpointindependent image features for identity classifications based on 2D full-body images.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".