MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Survey on Visual SLAM Algorithms Compatible for 3D Space Reconstruction and Navigation

2023· article· en· W4321192246 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venue2023 IEEE International Conference on Consumer Electronics (ICCE) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSimultaneous localization and mappingComputer scienceOccupancy grid mappingRobotPoint cloudArtificial intelligenceTask (project management)Computer visionGridGround truthCollision avoidanceMobile robotMotion planningSpace (punctuation)AlgorithmCollisionMathematicsEngineeringComputer securitySystems engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Applications of the robots are increasing in routine for shop floor activity, transportation, and many other areas. While navigation, space reconstruction, and collision avoidance are the primary task of robots, not all simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM) methods can be useful given that requirement of output is preferably in the specific form of 3D occupancy grid or point cloud in order to implement it on a real robot. This paper focuses on extensive study of conventional and deep learning based SLAM models that should be useful to create 3D output. In addition to that, we explored various available open source dataset considering provided ground truth convenient for evaluating 3D mapping and explain relevant evaluation criteria available in literature. Overall, this paper can be the first of its kind that focuses on all components of 3D SLAM systems.

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 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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.258 · 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