Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Robert Speyer

dblp:36/100 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2007
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
1 paper
3D vision · 100%
Computer networks
1 paper
Internet of things and sensor networks · 100%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 2, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computer vision › 3D vision
visual localization
0.112007
Geolocating Static Cameras · ICCV 2007
Internet of things and sensor networks › camera sensor networks › camera networks
distributed camera network
0.012007
Geolocating Static Cameras · ICCV 2007

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

summary statistics · 0.1principal component analysis · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2007 Geolocating Static Cameras
abstract
A key problem in widely distributed camera networks is locating the cameras. This paper considers three scenarios for camera localization: localizing a camera in an unknown environment, adding a new camera in a region with many other cameras, and localizing a camera by finding correlations with satellite imagery. We find that simple summary statistics (the time course of principal component coefficients) are sufficient to geolocate cameras without determining correspondences between cameras or explicitly reasoning about weather in the scene. We present results from a database of images from 538 cameras collected over the course of a year. We find that for cameras that remain stationary and for which we have accurate image times- tamps, we can localize most cameras to within 50 miles of the known location. In addition, we demonstrate the use of a distributed camera network in the construction a map of weather conditions.
Nathan Jacobs, Scott Satkin, Nathaniel Roman, Robert Speyer, Robert Pless
ICCV4