Standardized 3D test object for multi-camera calibration during animal pose capture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate capture of animal behavior and posture requires the use of multiple cameras to reconstruct three-dimensional (3D) representations. Typically, a paper ChArUco (or checker) board works well for correcting distortion and calibrating for 3D reconstruction in stereo vision. However, measuring the error in two-dimensional (2D) is also prone to bias related to the placement of the 2D board in 3D. We proposed a procedure as a visual way of validating camera placement, and it also can provide some guidance about the positioning of cameras and potential advantages of using multiple cameras. We propose the use of a 3D printable test object for validating multi-camera surround-view calibration in small animal video capture arenas. The proposed 3D printed object has no bias to a particular dimension and is designed to minimize occlusions. The use of the calibrated test object provided an estimate of 3D reconstruction accuracy. The approach reveals that for complex specimens such as mice, some view angles will be more important for accurate capture of keypoints. Our method ensures accurate 3D camera calibration for surround image capture of laboratory mice and other specimens.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".