Bibliographic record
Abstract
The datasets are original and specifically collected for research aimed at reducing registration errors between Camera-LiDAR datasets. Traditional methods often struggle with aligning 2D-3D data from sources that have different coordinate systems and resolutions. Our collection comprises six datasets from two distinct setups, designed to enhance versatility in our approach and improve matching accuracy across both high-feature and low-feature environments. Survey-Grade Terrestrial Dataset: Collection Details: Data was gathered across various scenes on the University of New Brunswick campus, including low-feature walls, high-feature laboratory rooms, and outdoor tree environments. Equipment: LiDAR data was captured using a Trimble TX5 3D Laser Scanner, while optical images were taken with a Canon EOS 5D Mark III DSLR camera. Mobile Mapping System Dataset: Collection Details: This dataset was collected using our custom-built Simultaneous Localization and Multi-Sensor Mapping Robot (SLAMM-BOT) in several indoor mobile scenes to validate our methods. Equipment: Data was acquired using a Velodyne VLP-16 LiDAR scanner and an Arducam IMX477 Mini camera, controlled via a Raspberry Pi board.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.971 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".