MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2960081125 · doi:10.1145/3306346.3322942

Multi-robot collaborative dense scene reconstruction

2019· article· en· W2960081125 on OpenAlexaff
Siyan Dong, Kai Xu, Qiang Zhou, Andrea Tagliasacchi, Shiqing Xin, Matthias Nießner, Baoquan Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsGoogle (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRobotComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Task (project management)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionSet (abstract data type)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an autonomous scanning approach which allows multiple robots to perform collaborative scanning for dense 3D reconstruction of unknown indoor scenes. Our method plans scanning paths for several robots, allowing them to efficiently coordinate with each other such that the collective scanning coverage and reconstruction quality is maximized while the overall scanning effort is minimized. To this end, we define the problem as a dynamic task assignment and introduce a novel formulation based on Optimal Mass Transport (OMT). Given the currently scanned scene, a set of task views are extracted to cover scene regions which are either unknown or uncertain. These task views are assigned to the robots based on the OMT optimization. We then compute for each robot a smooth path over its assigned tasks by solving an approximate traveling salesman problem. In order to showcase our algorithm, we implement a multi-robot auto-scanning system. Since our method is computationally efficient, we can easily run it in real time on commodity hardware, and combine it with online RGB-D reconstruction approaches. In our results, we show several real-world examples of large indoor environments; in addition, we build a benchmark with a series of carefully designed metrics for quantitatively evaluating multi-robot autoscanning. Overall, we are able to demonstrate high-quality scanning results with respect to reconstruction quality and scanning efficiency, which significantly outperforms existing multi-robot exploration systems.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations109
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207