MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124624839 · doi:10.15353/jcvis.v6i1.3561

Rectification Based Single-Shot Structured Light for Accurate and Dense 3D Reconstruction

2021· article· en· W3124624839 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Sina Farsangi, Mohamed A. Naiel, Mark Lamm, Paul Fieguth

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsChristie (Canada)University of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionComputer scienceQuadrilateralProjectorRectificationShot (pellet)3D reconstructionStructured lightSingle shotPixelPoint cloudOne shotComputer graphics (images)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Structured Light (SL) patterns generated based on pseudo-random arrays are widely used for single-shot 3D reconstruction using projector-camera systems. These SL images consist of a set of tags with different appearances, where these patterns will be projected on a target surface, then captured by a camera and decoded. The precision of localizing these tags from captured camera images affects the quality of the pixel-correspondences between the projector and the camera, and consequently that of the derived 3D shape. In this paper, we incorporate a quadrilateral representation for the detected SL tags that allows the construction of robust and accurate pixel-correspondences and the application of a spatial rectification module that leads to high tag classification accuracy. When applying the proposed method to single-shot 3D reconstruction, we show the effectiveness of this method over a baseline in estimating denser and more accurate 3D point-clouds.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational Vision and Imaging SystemsSame topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207