MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768891351 · doi:10.1109/iccvw.2017.87

Deep Learning Anthropomorphic 3D Point Clouds from a Single Depth Map Camera Viewpoint

2017· article· en· W2768891351 on OpenAlexaff
Nolan Lunscher, John Zelek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint cloudArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer visionDeep learningPoint (geometry)Object (grammar)Depth mapSizingMatching (statistics)Computer graphics (images)Image (mathematics)MathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In footwear, fit is highly dependent on foot shape, which is not fully captured by shoe size. Scanners can be used to acquire better sizing information and allow for more personalized footwear matching, however when scanning an object, many images are usually needed for reconstruction. Semantics such as knowing the kind of object in view can be leveraged to determine the full 3D shape given only one input view. Deep learning methods have been shown to be able to reconstruct 3D shape from limited inputs in highly symmetrical objects such as furniture and vehicles. We apply a deep learning approach to the domain of foot scanning, and present a method to reconstruct a 3D point cloud from a single input depth map. Anthropomorphic body parts can be challenging due to their irregular shapes, difficulty for parameterizing and limited symmetries. We train a view synthesis based network and show that our method can produce foot scans with accuracies of 1.55 mm from a single input depth map.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207