Analysis of Robust Functions for Registration Algorithms
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Registration accuracy is influenced by the presence of outliers and numerous robust solutions have been developed over the years to mitigate their effect. However, without a large scale comparison of solutions to filter outliers, it is becoming tedious to select an appropriate algorithm for a given application. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the effects of outlier filters on the Iterative Closest Point (ICP) algorithm aimed at a mobile robotic application. Fourteen of the most common outlier filters (such as M-estimators) have been tested in different types of environments, for a total of more than two million registrations. Furthermore, the influence of tuning parameters has been thoroughly explored. The experimental results show that most outlier filters have a similar performance if they are correctly tuned. Nonetheless, filters such as Var. Trim., Cauchy, and Cauchy MAD are more stable against different environment types. Interestingly, the simple norm L <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sub> produces comparable accuracy, while being parameterless.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it