MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7002367467

New Algorithms for 3D Registration Using Raw Point Techniques

2018· dissertation· en· W7002367467 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint (geometry)GeneralizationNoise (video)Feature (linguistics)Filter (signal processing)Matching (statistics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Registration of two 3D point clouds is a problem encountered in many domains in 3D computer vision. A correct correspondence between the overlapping portions of the point clouds can be used to generate a transform that registers the two point clouds. The search for correspondences can be done using techniques that attempt to find similarity between local or global surface geometry. However, such methods have their limitations. Global methods fail when there is significant surface occlusion, while local ones degrade in performance in the face of noise and outliers. In cases of significant occlusion, noise, and outliers, it is best to rely on a large number of correspondences between very small subsets of points [3]. The higher the number of correspondences, the more likely it is to find the correspondence that represents the correct transformation to achieve registration. In this thesis, a generalization to these subsets that allows us to control the degree of their ambiguity is introduced. Our generalization provides a way to optimize the number of correspondences as to achieve the maximum speed up without sacrificing robustness. We show that for the problem of offline registration we can achieve a speed up factor of up to 4.4x using our generalized version of the algorithm. We also use our generalization with and improved version of 4PCS [52], and show that we can achieve further efficiency improvements over the state of the art in raw point registration iIn addition to the generalization of the 4-Point Congruent sets method, we present a novel RANSAC framework for 3D registration. Unlike the standard RANSAC ap- proach, our approach requires sampling only 2 points and thus reducing the worst time complexity of the algorithm. We present two flavours of this approach and evalu- ate it by comparing it to 4PCS and Super 4PCS. We achieve a speed up improvement of up to 57x over 4PCS and are on par with Super 4PCS in most cases.

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)0.004
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.011

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicPrenatal Screening and Diagnostics→French-language works237,207→