USIP: Unsupervised Stable Interest Point Detection From 3D Point Clouds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose the USIP detector: an Unsupervised Stable Interest Point detector that can detect highly repeatable and accurately localized keypoints from 3D point clouds under arbitrary transformations without the need for any ground truth training data. Our USIP detector consists of a feature proposal network that learns stable keypoints from input 3D point clouds and their respective transformed pairs from randomly generated transformations. We provide degeneracy analysis and suggest solutions to prevent it. We encourage high repeatability and accurate localization of the keypoints with a probabilistic chamfer loss that minimizes the distances between the detected keypoints from the training point cloud pairs. Extensive experimental results of repeatability tests on several simulated and real-world 3D point cloud datasets from Lidar, RGB-D and CAD models show that our USIP detector significantly outperforms existing hand-crafted and deep learning-based 3D keypoint detectors. Our code is available at the project website. https://github.com/lijx10/USIP.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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".