MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3144906546 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.02527

Vote from the Center: 6 DoF Pose Estimation in RGB-D Images by Radial Keypoint Voting

2021· preprint· en· W3144906546 on OpenAlexaff
Yangzheng Wu, Mohsen Zand, Ali Etemad, Michael Greenspan

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRGB color modelPoseComputer visionOffset (computer science)Pattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a novel keypoint voting scheme based on intersecting spheres, that is more accurate than existing schemes and allows for fewer, more disperse keypoints. The scheme is based upon the distance between points, which as a 1D quantity can be regressed more accurately than the 2D and 3D vector and offset quantities regressed in previous work, yielding more accurate keypoint localization. The scheme forms the basis of the proposed RCVPose method for 6 DoF pose estimation of 3D objects in RGB-D data, which is particularly effective at handling occlusions. A CNN is trained to estimate the distance between the 3D point corresponding to the depth mode of each RGB pixel, and a set of 3 disperse keypoints defined in the object frame. At inference, a sphere centered at each 3D point is generated, of radius equal to this estimated distance. The surfaces of these spheres vote to increment a 3D accumulator space, the peaks of which indicate keypoint locations. The proposed radial voting scheme is more accurate than previous vector or offset schemes, and is robust to disperse keypoints. Experiments demonstrate RCVPose to be highly accurate and competitive, achieving state-of-the-art results on the LINEMOD 99.7% and YCB-Video 97.2% datasets, notably scoring +4.9% higher 71.1% than previous methods on the challenging Occlusion LINEMOD dataset, and on average outperforming all other published results from the BOP benchmark for these 3 datasets. Our code is available at http://www.github.com/aaronwool/rcvpose.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.137 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207