MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134122111 · doi:10.3390/s21051839

FSD-BRIEF: A Distorted BRIEF Descriptor for Fisheye Image Based on Spherical Perspective Model

2021· article· en· W3134122111 on OpenAlexaff
Yutong Zhang, Jianmei Song, Yan Ding, Yating Yuan, Hua‐Liang Wei

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceCentroidFeature (linguistics)Computer visionDistortion (music)Matching (statistics)Perspective (graphical)Image (mathematics)Computer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Robustness (evolution)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fisheye images with a far larger Field of View (FOV) have severe radial distortion, with the result that the associated image feature matching process cannot achieve the best performance if the traditional feature descriptors are used. To address this challenge, this paper reports a novel distorted Binary Robust Independent Elementary Feature (BRIEF) descriptor for fisheye images based on a spherical perspective model. Firstly, the 3D gray centroid of feature points is designed, and the position and direction of the feature points on the spherical image are described by a constructed feature point attitude matrix. Then, based on the attitude matrix of feature points, the coordinate mapping relationship between the BRIEF descriptor template and the fisheye image is established to realize the computation associated with the distorted BRIEF descriptor. Four experiments are provided to test and verify the invariance and matching performance of the proposed descriptor for a fisheye image. The experimental results show that the proposed descriptor works well for distortion invariance and can significantly improve the matching performance in fisheye images.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.790
Threshold uncertainty score0.894

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced Image and Video Retrieval TechniquesFrench-language works237,207