MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806305228 · doi:10.1109/syscon.2018.8369571

Localization of specific body part by multiple depth sensors network

2018· article· en· W2806305228 on OpenAlexaff
Nasreen Mohsin, Shahram Payandeh

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 Annual IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionPoint cloudArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceGeodesicRGB color modelBody surfaceDepth mapWearable computerImage (mathematics)MathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores tracking of specific body part by a network of multiple depth sensors. The usage of data from multiple depth sensors overcomes not only occlusion problems, but also visual challenges associated with RGB sensors under low illumination. Also, the identity of surveyed patient will be kept confidential as the silhouette of person is only shown in depth images. After determining relative poses between depth sensors, any point from depth image plane of any sensor can be transformed and projected onto depth image plane of another observing sensor. Such localization aid in overcoming occlusions observed in one sensor through obtaining information on the occluded parts from another sensor. Our paper introduces sensor scheduling system in which one of the multiple depth sensors' 3D co-ordinate frame is selected as world coordinate frame, contains fused point cloud and can track various limbs and parts such as head, hands and feet over time. To localize salient body extremities, a surface triangular mesh is applied on 3D fused point cloud with its corresponding generated geodesic extrema of that mesh coinciding with body extremities. The body extremities can be labelled based on those relative geodesic distances between body extremities. In evaluation, our multiple depth sensors system has managed to successfully localize specific body part i.e. head with less error against ground truth.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.890

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 Annual IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon)Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207