MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890659491 · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2018.00157

Deep Learning Whole Body Point Cloud Scans from a Single Depth Map

2018· article· en· W2890659491 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 cloudComputer scienceDeep learningProcess (computing)Artificial intelligencePoint (geometry)Computer visionImplementationSimple (philosophy)Cloud computingMobile deviceHuman–computer interactionSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Personalized knowledge about body shape has numerous applications in fashion and clothing, as well as in health monitoring. Whole body 3D scanning presents a relatively simple mechanism for individuals to obtain this information about themselves without needing much knowledge of anthropometry. With current implementations however, scanning devices are large, complex and expensive. In order to make such systems as accessible and widespread as possible, it is necessary to simplify the process and reduce their hardware requirements. Deep learning models have emerged as the leading method of tackling visual tasks, including various aspects of 3D reconstruction. In this paper we demonstrate that by leveraging deep learning it is possible to create very simple whole body scanners that only require a single input depth map to operate. We show that our presented model is able to produce whole body point clouds with an accuracy of 5.19 mm.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207