Creating and chaining camera moves for quadrotor videography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Capturing aerial videos with a quadrotor-mounted camera is a challenging creative task, as it requires the simultaneous control of the quadrotor's motion and the mounted camera's orientation. Letting the drone follow a pre-planned trajectory is a much more appealing option, and recent research has proposed a number of tools designed to automate the generation of feasible camera motion plans; however, these tools typically require the user to specify and edit the camera path, for example by providing a complete and ordered sequence of key viewpoints. In this paper, we propose a higher level tool designed to enable even novice users to easily capture compelling aerial videos of large-scale outdoor scenes. Using a coarse 2.5D model of a scene, the user is only expected to specify starting and ending viewpoints and designate a set of landmarks, with or without a particular order. Our system automatically generates a diverse set of candidate local camera moves for observing each landmark, which are collision-free, smooth, and adapted to the shape of the landmark. These moves are guided by a landmark-centric view quality field, which combines visual interest and frame composition. An optimal global camera trajectory is then constructed that chains together a sequence of local camera moves, by choosing one move for each landmark and connecting them with suitable transition trajectories. This task is formulated and solved as an instance of the Set Traveling Salesman Problem.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".