MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MATCHING REAL AND SYNTHETIC PANORAMIC IMAGES USING A VARIANT OF GEOMETRIC HASHING

2017· article· en· W2620563801 on OpenAlexafffund
Julien Li-Chee-Ming, Costas Armenakis

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topic3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYork University
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceFiducial markerTracking (education)PhotogrammetryMatching (statistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. This work demonstrates an approach to automatically initialize a visual model-based tracker, and recover from lost tracking, without prior camera pose information. These approaches are commonly referred to as tracking-by-detection. Previous tracking-by-detection techniques used either fiducials (i.e. landmarks or markers) or the object’s texture. The main contribution of this work is the development of a tracking-by-detection algorithm that is based solely on natural geometric features. A variant of geometric hashing, a model-to-image registration algorithm, is proposed that searches for a matching panoramic image from a database of synthetic panoramic images captured in a 3D virtual environment. The approach identifies corresponding features between the matched panoramic images. The corresponding features are to be used in a photogrammetric space resection to estimate the camera pose. The experiments apply this algorithm to initialize a model-based tracker in an indoor environment using the 3D CAD model of the building.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topic3D Surveying and Cultural HeritageFrench-language works237,207