MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773365015 · doi:10.1109/iros.2017.8202221

Context-coherent scenes of objects for camera pose estimation

2017· article· en· W2773365015 on OpenAlexaff
Jimmy Li, David Meger, Gregory Dudek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligencePoseComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)Computer visionPairwise comparison3D pose estimationCognitive neuroscience of visual object recognitionObject (grammar)Feature (linguistics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Object detectionFocus (optics)Articulated body pose estimationFeature extraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose an approach to vision-based pose estimation using object recognition and identity. Whereas feature based scene recognition and pose estimation methods are well established as effective means for estimating motion and recognizing locations, feature-based methods depend critically on the detection of common local features from one view of a scene to another. We focus on place recognition and pose change estimation in the context of large changes in viewing position, even to the extent that no common surfaces are seen between the two views. Our approach is based on using object identities and their inter-relationship to compute pose change. An important secondary outcome of our method is that it simultaneously infers the 3D poses of objects in the scene that are used as features. Such an object-based approach is inspired by a vast literature on human perception and has the potential for great robustness, albeit at the expense of accuracy. We propose a formulation of the problem using pairwise contextual constraints and develop an efficient algorithmic solution. We validate the approach and quantify its performance using the publicly available TUM SLAM dataset [1].

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations13
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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