MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379116572 · doi:10.1109/lra.2023.3282381

Use Your Imagination: A Detector-Independent Approach for LiDAR Quality Booster

2023· article· en· W4379116572 on OpenAlexaff
Zeping Zhang, Tianran Liu, Robert Laganière

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint cloudLidarComputer scienceInferenceArtificial intelligenceRGB color modelPoint (geometry)Block (permutation group theory)DetectorProcess (computing)Computer visionRemote sensingMathematicsGeographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Features from LiDAR and cameras are considered to be complementary. However, due to the sparsity of the LiDAR point clouds, a dense and accurate RGB/3D projective relationship is difficult to establish especially for distant scene points. Recent works try to solve this problem by designing a network that learns missing points or dense point density distributions to compensate for the sparsity of the LiDAR point cloud. In this work, we propose to use an imagine-and-locate process, called UYI. The objective of this module is to improve the point cloud quality and is independent of the detection network used for inference. We accomplish this task through a GAN based cross-modality module which uses an image as input to infer a dense LiDAR shape. Boosted by our UYI block, our experiments show a significant performance improvement in all tested baseline models. In fact, benefiting from the plug-and-play characteristics of our module, we were able to push the performance of existing state-of-the-art model to a new height. Code is available at <uri xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">www.eecs.uottawa.ca/research/viva/projects/uyi</uri> .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.510

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207