MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Object Semantics Give Us the Depth We Need: Multi-Task Approach to Aerial Depth Completion

2023· article· en· W4391308406 on OpenAlexaff
Sara Hatami Gazani, Fardad Dadboud, Miodrag Bolić, Iraj Mantegh, Homayoun Najjaran

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTask (project management)Semantics (computer science)Object (grammar)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionProgramming languageNatural language processingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depth completion and object detection are two crucial tasks often used for aerial 3D mapping, path planning, and collision avoidance of Uncrewed Aerial Vehicles (UAVs). Common solutions include using measurements from a LiDAR sensor; however, the generated point cloud is often sparse and irregular and limits the system's capabilities in 3D rendering and safety-critical decision-making. To mitigate this challenge, information from other sensors on the UAV (viz., a camera used for object detection) is utilized to help the depth completion process generate denser 3D models. Performing both aerial depth completion and object detection tasks while fusing the data from the two sensors poses a challenge to resource efficiency. We address this challenge by proposing a novel approach to jointly execute the two tasks in a single pass. The proposed method is based on an encoder-focused multi-task learning model that exposes the two tasks to jointly learned features. We demonstrate how semantic expectations of the objects in the scene learned by the object detection pathway can boost the performance of the depth completion pathway while regressing the missing depth values. Experimental results show that the proposed multi-task network outperforms its single-task counterpart, particularly when exposed to defective inputs.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207