MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133031134

Streamlining Calibration: Eliminating Infrastructure and Certifying Optimality

2025· dissertation· W7133031134 on OpenAlexaff
Emmett Spencer Wise

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalibrationInitializationRobustness (evolution)Process (computing)Sensor fusionOffset (computer science)Transformation (genetics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomous systems often fuse data from multiple sensors and sensing modalities to improve robustness when operating in adverse conditions. Correct sensor fusion requires knowledge of the transformations between the sensor reference frames as well as the temporal offsets between the sensor measurement times. Due to modifications and wear-and-tear, estimates of these parameters may become inaccurate over time, and end-users of autonomous systems in turn require processes to estimate these parameters. The process of estimating the spatial transformation is known as extrinsic calibration, while the process of estimating the temporal offset is known as temporal calibration. Jointly estimating both sets of parameters is known as spatiotemporal calibration. Many state-of-the-art calibration methods require specialized targets and rough initial guesses for the parameters of interest. These requirements limit potential sensor configurations and calibration venues (e.g., the environment must contain a target and all sensors must view that singular target). In this thesis, we seek to lift these restrictions and streamline the calibration process for end-users. Initially, we explore a method to eliminate specialized targets in spatiotemporal calibration where one sensor is a radar. We then develop a targetless extrinsic calibration method for pairs of radars. Additionally, we apply recent results from convex optimization to two classic calibration problems, the hand-eye calibration problem and the hand-eye-robot-world calibration problem, yielding solutions for the optimal calibration parameters (for a dataset) without prior knowledge. Through simulation studies and real-world experiments, we demonstrate that our methods achieve estimation accuracy similar to or better than other calibration methods that require initialization or specialized targets.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207