Bag of Views: An Appearance-Based Approach to Next-Best-View Planning for 3D Reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UAV-based intelligent data acquisition for 3D reconstruction and monitoring of infrastructure has experienced an increasing surge of interest due to recent advancements in image processing and deep learning-based techniques. View planning is an essential part of this task that dictates the information capture strategy and heavily impacts the quality of the 3D model generated from the captured data. Recent methods have used prior knowledge or partial reconstruction of the target to accomplish view planning for active reconstruction; the former approach poses a challenge for complex or newly identified targets while the latter is computationally expensive. In this work, we present Bag-of-Views (BoV), a fully appearance-based model used to assign utility to the captured views for both offline dataset refinement and online next-best-view (NBV) planning applications targeting the task of 3D reconstruction. With this contribution, we also developed the View Planning Toolbox (VPT), a lightweight package for training and testing machine learning-based view planning frameworks, custom view dataset generation of arbitrary 3D scenes, and 3D reconstruction. Through experiments which pair a BoV-based reinforcement learning model with VPT, we demonstrate the efficacy of our model in reducing the number of required views for high-quality reconstructions in dataset refinement and NBV planning.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".