A fast bundle adjustment method based on track selection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bundle adjustment is the core of the Structure from Motion algorithm, and it is also a very time-consuming part, in which redundant observations and initial parameter values with large errors increase the time consumption of the algorithm. In order to improve the efficiency of bundle adjustment, we propose an track selection method based on uniformity, accuracy, coverage and connectivity criteria. Firstly, we divide the space of tracks into several 3D grids. Secondly, we start from the grid with the largest number of tracks, and eliminate the redundant tracks with low connectivity and low accuracy in each grid, while ensuring the connectivity and coverage of tracks. Finally, we use a variety of experimental data to verify this algorithm. The result shows that the algorithm can delete a large number of redundant tracks, and effectively improve the efficiency of the bundle adjustment method on the premise of ensuring the accuracy. When the track retention rate is 0.4, the efficiency of the bundle adjustment method is increased by about 2 times, and the corresponding precision loss value is 0.026.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".