Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depth information is widely used for representation, reconstruction and modeling of 3D scene. Generally two kinds of methods can obtain the depth information. One is to use the distance cues from the depth camera, but the results heavily depend on the device, and the accuracy is degraded greatly when the distance from the object is increased. The other one uses the binocular cues from the matching to obtain the depth information. It is more and more mature and convenient to collect the depth information of different scenes by stereo matching methods. In the objective function, the data term is to ensure that the difference between the matched pixels is small, and the smoothness term is to smooth the neighbors with different disparities. Nonetheless, the smoothness term blurs the boundary depth information of the object which becomes the bottleneck of the stereo matching. This paper proposes a novel energy function for the boundary to keep the discontinuities and uses the Hopfield neural network to solve the optimization. We first extract the region of interest areas which are the boundary pixels in original images. Then, we develop the boundary energy function to calculate the matching cost. At last, we solve the optimization globally by the Hopfield neural network. The Middlebury stereo benchmark is used to test the proposed method, and results show that our boundary depth information is more accurate than other state-of-the-art methods and can be used to optimize the results of other stereo matching methods.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".