Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rigid registration is a fundamental process in many applications that require alignment of different datasets. Iterative closest point (ICP) is a widely used algorithm that iteratively finds point correspondences and updates the rigid transformation. One of the key variants of ICP to its success is the selection of points, which is directly related to the convergence and robustness of the ICP algorithm. Besides uniform sampling, there are a number of normal-based and feature-based approaches that consider normal, curvature, and/or other signals in the point selection. Among them, normal-space sampling (NSS) is one of the most popular techniques due to its simplicity and low computational cost. The rationale of NSS is to sample enough constraints to determine all the components of transformation, but this paper finds that NSS actually can constrain the translational normal space only. This paper extends the fundamental idea of NSS and proposes Dual NSS (DNSS) to sample points in both translational and rotational normal spaces. Compared with NSS, this approach has similar simplicity and efficiency without any need of additional information, but has a much better effectiveness. Experimental results show that DNSS can outperform the normal-based and feature-based methods in terms of convergence and robustness. For example, DNSS can achieve convergence from an orthogonal initial position while no other methods can achieve. Note to Practitioners-ICP is commonly used to align different data to a same coordination system. While NSS is often used to speed up the alignment process by down-sampling the data uniformly in the normal space. The implementation of NSS only has three steps: 1) construct a set of buckets in the normal-space; 2) put all points of the data into buckets based on their normal direction; and 3) uniformly pick points from all the buckets until the desired number of points is selected. The algorithm is simple and fast, so that it is still the common practice. However, the weakness of NSS comes from the reason that it cannot handle rotational uncertainties. In this paper, a new algorithm called DNSS is developed to constrain both translation and rotation at the same time by introducing a dual-normal space. With a new definition of the normal space, the algorithm complexity of DNSS is the same as that of NSS, and it can be readily implemented in all types of application that are currently using ICP. The experimental results show that DNSS has better efficiency, quality, and reliability than both normal-based and feature-based methods have.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".