MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133317383 · doi:10.1109/iccvw54120.2021.00390

Blocks World Revisited: The Effect of Self-Occlusion on Classification by Convolutional Neural Networks

2021· preprint· en· W3133317383 on OpenAlexafffund
Markus D. Solbach, John K. Tsotsos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkArtificial intelligenceOcclusionComputer scienceObject (grammar)Context (archaeology)Deep learningArtificial neural networkComputer visionOrientation (vector space)Pattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the recent successes in computer vision, there remain new avenues to explore. In this work, we propose a new dataset to investigate the effect of self-occlusion on deep neural networks. With TEOS (The Effect of Self-Occlusion), we propose a 3D blocks world dataset that focuses on the geometric shape of 3D objects and their omnipresent self-occlusion. We designed TEOS to investigate the role of self-occlusion in the context of object classification. In the real-world, self-occlusion of 3D objects still presents significant challenges for deep learning approaches. However, humans deal with this by deploying complex strategies, for instance, by changing the viewpoint or manipulating the scene to gather necessary information. With TEOS, we present a dataset with two subsets (L1and L2), containing 36 and 12 objects, respectively. We provide 768 uniformly sampled views of each object, their mask, object and camera position, orientation, amount of self-occlusion, as well as the CAD model of each object. We present baseline evaluations with five well-known classification deep neural networks and show that TEOS poses a significant challenge for all of them. The dataset, as well as the pre-trained models, are made publicly available for the scientific community under https: //data.nvision.eecs.yorku.ca/TEOS.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207