MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2967775316 · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2019.00305

Sports Camera Calibration via Synthetic Data

2019· article· en· W2967775316 on OpenAlexaff
Jianhui Chen, James J. Little

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVideo Analysis and Summarization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceRobustness (evolution)Computer visionCamera auto-calibrationCamera resectioningPoseSmart cameraGenerative adversarial networkFeature (linguistics)Feature extractionSynthetic dataImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calibrating sports cameras is important for autonomous broadcasting and sports analysis. Here we propose a highly automatic method for calibrating sports cameras from a single image using synthetic data. First, we develop a novel camera pose engine that generates camera poses by randomly sampling camera parameters. The camera pose engine has only three significant free parameters so that it can effectively generate diverse camera poses and corresponding edge (i.e. field marking) images. Then, we learn compact feature descriptors via a siamese network from paired edge images and build a feature-pose database. After that, we use a novel GAN (generative adversarial network) model to detect field markings in real images. Finally, we query an initial camera pose from the feature-pose database and refine camera poses using truncated distance images. We evaluate our method on both synthetic and real data. Our method not only demonstrates the robustness on the synthetic data but also achieves state-of-the-art accuracy on a standard soccer dataset and very high performance on a volleyball dataset.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations101
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVideo Analysis and SummarizationFrench-language works237,207