MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385881217 · doi:10.1145/3609703.3609705

Reconstructing 3D Shapes as an Union of Boxes from Multi-View Images

2023· article· en· W4385881217 on OpenAlexaff
Zihan Yang, Minglun Gong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer visionRepresentation (politics)Task (project management)Object (grammar)InferenceVoxelRoboticsRGB color modelSimultaneous localization and mappingRobotMobile robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The task of reconstructing object shapes from input images has become increasingly important in various fields, such as computer vision, robotics, augmented reality, video games, and autonomous vehicles. While approaches for reconstructing shapes with varying levels of detail have been proposed, balancing representation accuracy and model complexity remains a challenge. To address this challenge, we propose an end-to-end approach for reconstructing object shapes from multiple images using a union of box primitives. Our approach offers a simpler and more efficient 3D representation of objects without the need for intermediate products such as voxels, resulting in faster inference times. Additionally, we introduce an auxiliary task to aid in learning how to extract and transform spatial features from images without requiring camera calibrations. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method can produce comparable results to approaches that require 3D voxelized input while utilizing only 2D RGB images as input. Furthermore, our method significantly outperforms the aforementioned approaches in terms of inference time.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.004

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207