MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Adaptive Refinement Scheme for Depth Estimation Networks

2022· preprint· en· W4307356725 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Alizadeh Naeini, Mohammad Moein Sheikholeslami, Gunho Sohn

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Computer scienceInferenceGeneralizationScheme (mathematics)Particle swarm optimizationArtificial intelligenceSegmentationFunction (biology)AlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning, specifically the supervised approach, has proved to be a breakthrough in depth prediction. However, the generalization ability of deep networks is still limited, and they cannot maintain a satisfactory performance on some inputs. Addressing a similar problem in the segmentation field, a scheme (f-BRS) has been proposed to refine predictions in the inference time. f-BRS adapts an intermediate activation function to each input by using user clicks as sparse labels. Given the similarity between user clicks and sparse depth maps, this paper aims at extending the application of f-BRS to depth prediction. Our experiments show that f-BRS, fused with a depth estimation baseline, is trapped in local optima, and fails to improve the network predictions. To resolve that, we propose a double-stage adaptive refinement scheme (DARS). In the first stage, a Delaunay-based correction module significantly improves the depth generated by a baseline network. In the second stage, a particle swarm optimizer (PSO) delineates the estimation through fine-tuning f-BRS parameters—that is, scales and biases. DARS is evaluated on an outdoor benchmark, KITTI, and an indoor benchmark, NYUv2 while for both the network is pre-trained on KITTI. The proposed scheme outperformed rival methods on both datasets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.522
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.152
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207