Automated calibration of smartphone cameras for 3D reconstruction of mechanical pipes
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
Abstract This paper outlines a new framework for the calibration of optical instruments, in particular smartphone cameras, using highly redundant circular black‐and‐white target fields. New methods were introduced for (i) matching targets between images; (ii) adjusting the systematic eccentricity error of target centres; and (iii) iteratively improving the calibration solution through a free‐network self‐calibrating bundle adjustment. The proposed method effectively matched circular targets in 270 smartphone images, taken within a calibration laboratory, with robustness to type II errors (false negatives). The proposed eccentricity adjustment, which requires only camera projective matrices from two views, behaved comparably to available closed‐form solutions, which require additional a priori object‐space target information. Finally, specifically for the case of mobile devices, the calibration parameters obtained using the framework were found to be superior compared to in situ calibration for estimating the 3D reconstructed radius of a mechanical pipe (approximately 45 % improvement on average).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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