MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402727743 · doi:10.1109/cvpr52733.2024.01951

Edge-Aware 3D Instance Segmentation Network with Intelligent Semantic Prior

2024· article· en· W4402727743 on OpenAlexaff
Wonseok Roh, Hwanhee Jung, Giljoo Nam, Jinseop Yeom, Hyunje Park, Sang Ho Yoon, Sangpil Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersIran Telecommunication Research CenterKorea Creative Content Agency
KeywordsComputer scienceSegmentationArtificial intelligenceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionNatural language processingPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While recent 3D instance segmentation approaches show promising results based on transformer architectures, they often fail to correctly identify instances with similar appearances. They also ambiguously determine edges, leading to multiple misclassifications of adjacent edge points. In this work, we introduce a novel framework, called EASE, to overcome these challenges and improve the perception of complex 3D instances. We first propose a semantic guidance network to leverage rich semantic knowledge from a language model as intelligent priors, enhancing the functional understanding of real-world instances beyond relying solely on geometrical information. We explicitly instruct the basic instance queries using text embeddings of each instance to learn deep semantic details. Further, we utilize the edge prediction module, encouraging the segmentation network to be edge-aware. We extract voxel-wise edge maps from point features and use them as auxiliary information for learning edge cues. In our extensive experiments on large-scale benchmarks, ScanNetV2, ScanNet200, S3DIS, and STPLS3D, our EASE outperforms existing state-of-the-art models, demonstrating its superior performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topic3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207