Improving 3D reconstruction accuracy in wavelet transform profilometry by reducing shadow effects
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
Wavelet transform profilometry is a three‐dimensional (3D) reconstruction method based on the structured light technique of fringe pattern projection, widely used because it is a non‐invasive, high‐performance 3D reconstruction method. The presence of shadows created by the object in the image capture process is an obstacle in obtaining accurate 3D reconstructions, as they add noise to the phase data, leading to artefacts in object reconstruction, even when using robust phase‐unwrapping algorithms. Since shadows present diverse intensities and shapes, detecting and eliminating their effects are challenging tasks. This work presents a novel method to detect shadow regions and reduce their effects in 3D reconstruction. The proposed method uses coloured fringe patterns to detect the shadows and mathematical morphology to condition the outlines of the shadow regions. The shadow outline information is used to interpolate the background‐plane fringe pattern onto the captured scene, where the shadows are detected. The mean squared error (MSE) of the reconstructed objects is reduced to 25% of the MSE without shadow removal, on an average, when using the Bioucas phase‐unwrapping method. When using the Ghiglia phase‐unwrapping method, the MSE reduction is to 8.3%, on an average, of the MSE in the shadow case.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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