MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6891630105 · doi:10.48448/y6t2-0086

iDet3D: Towards Efficient Interactive Object Detection for LiDAR Point Clouds

2024· other· en· W6891630105 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeverage (statistics)AnnotationMinimum bounding boxPoint cloudObject detectionObject (grammar)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurately annotating multiple 3D objects in LiDAR scenes is laborious and challenging. While a few previous studies have attempted to leverage semi-automatic methods for cost-effective bounding box annotation, such methods have limitation in efficiently handling numerous multi-class objects. To effectively accelerate 3D annotation pipelines, we propose iDet3D, an efficient interactive 3D object detector. Supporting a user-friendly 2D interface, which can ease the cognitive burden of exploring 3D space to provide click interactions, iDet3D enables users to annotate the entire objects in each scene with minimal interactions. Taking the spase nature of 3D point clouds into account, we design a negative click simulation to improve accuracy by reducing false-positive predictions. In addition, iDet3D incorporates two click propagation techniques to take full advantage of user interactions: (1) dense click guidance for keeping user-provided information throughout the network and (2) spatial click propagation for detecting other instances of the same class based on the user-specified objects. Through our extensive experiments, we present that our method can create precise annotations in a few clicks, which shows the practicality of iDet3D as an efficient annotation tool for 3D object detection.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0050.006
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.006

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207