Joint Geometry and Color Projection-Based Point Cloud Quality Metric
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Point cloud coding solutions have been recently standardized to address the needs of multiple application scenarios. The design and assessment of point cloud coding methods require reliable objective quality metrics to evaluate the level of degradation introduced by compression or any other type of processing. Several point cloud objective quality metrics have been recently proposed to reliably estimate human perceived quality, including the so-called projection-based metrics. In this context, this paper proposes a joint geometry and color projection-based point cloud objective quality metric which solves the critical weakness of this type of quality metrics, i.e., the misalignment between the reference and degraded projected images. Moreover, the proposed point cloud quality metric exploits the best performing 2D quality metrics in the literature to assess the quality of the projected images. The experimental results show that the proposed projection-based quality metric offers the best subjective-objective correlation performance in comparison with other metrics in the literature. The Pearson correlation gains regarding D1-PSNR and D2-PSNR metrics range between ~5% to ~70% on three different datasets when data with all coding degradations is considered.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it