Bag of Views: An Appearance-Based Approach to Next-Best-View Planning for 3D Reconstruction
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.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it