| Literature DB >> 35660754 |
Zhihai Liu1, Zhenrui Dai2, Qingliang Zeng2,3, Jinxia Liu1, Feiyi Liu2, Qing Lu4.
Abstract
The volume detection of medical mice feed is crucial to understand the food intake requirements of mice at different growth stages and to grasp their growth, development, and health status. Aiming at the problem of volume calculation in the way of feed bulk in mice, a method for detecting the bulk volume of feed in mice based on binocular stereo vision was proposed. Firstly, the three-dimensional point coordinates of the feed's surface were calculated using the binocular stereo vision three-dimensional reconstruction technology. The coordinates of these dense points formed a point cloud, and then the projection method was used to calculate the volume of the point cloud; and finally, the volume of the mice feed was obtained. We use the stereo matching data set provided by the Middlebury evaluation platform to conduct experimental verification. The results show that our method effectively improves the matching degree of stereo matching and makes the three-dimensional point coordinates of the obtained feed's surface more accurate. The point cloud is then denoised and Delaunay triangulated, and the volume of the tetrahedron obtained after the triangulation is calculated and summed to obtain the total volume. We used different sizes of wood instead of feed for multiple volume calculations, and the average error between the calculated volume and the real volume was 7.12%. The experimental results show that the volume of the remaining feed of mice can be calculated by binocular stereo vision.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35660754 PMCID: PMC9167305 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-13075-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Standard stereos vision system[21].
Figure 2Cross-based cost aggregation.
Figure 3Voronoi and delaunay triangulation.
Figure 4Triangular patch composite model.
Camera parameters.
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| Left camera intrinsic parameter matrix | |
| Left camera distortion factor | |
| Right camera intrinsic parameter matrix | |
| Right camera distortion factor | |
| Rotation matrix | |
| Translation vector |
Figure 5Image correction processing.
Figure 7Disparity maps generated by different cost computation methods.
Figure 6The effect of parameter changes on the error rate.
The specific parameter values of the experiment.
| Parameter | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 15 | 600 | 20 | 34 | 17 | 20 | 6 | 1.0 | 3.0 | 15 | 20 | 0.4 |
Mismatching rate of all pixel disparity for different cost computation methods(%).
| Method | Aloe | Baby1 | Books | Art | Bowling1 | Cloth1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AD-gradient | 15.619 | 30.249 | 39.199 | 43.969 | 40.329 | 31.319 |
| AD-census | 11.429 | 19.949 | 33.109 | 38.479 | 33.559 | 24.149 |
| Gradient-SD-census | 10.439 | 18.129 | 30.089 | 36.689 | 31.639 | 16.039 |
Mismatching rate of all pixel disparity for different stereo matching algorithms(%).
| Method | Aloe | Baby1 | Books | Cones | Bowling1 | Cloth1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GRD-GF | 19.428 | 20.412 | 33.412 | 41.169 | 35.149 | 18.246 |
| CG-NL | 17.521 | 21.458 | 32.154 | 41.025 | 33.059 | 19.419 |
| Ours | 10.439 | 18.129 | 30.089 | 36.689 | 31.639 | 16.039 |
Figure 8Disparity maps generated by different algorithms.
Figure 9Original feeding box image.
Figure 10The feeding box image, stereo matching result, and point cloud image.
Figure 11Point cloud image.
Data analysis of experimental results.
| Experiment number | Actual volume (mm3) | Measure volume (mm3) | Volume error rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 88,357.25 | 93,948.52 | 6.33 |
| 2 | 121,933.12 | 130,420.14 | 6.96 |
| 3 | 122,286.50 | 131,097.15 | 7.20 |
| 4 | 145,848.40 | 156,241.75 | 7.13 |
| 5 | 156,215.65 | 168,347.78 | 7.76 |
| 6 | 158,972.45 | 169,986.95 | 6.93 |
| 7 | 173,887.20 | 184,535.49 | 6.12 |
| 8 | 176,714.60 | 187,965.68 | 6.37 |
| 9 | 175,300.80 | 188,946.27 | 7.78 |
| 10 | 91,891.60 | 98,768.57 | 7.48 |
| 11 | 136,580.70 | 147,253.26 | 7.81 |
| 12 | 91,341.80 | 98,251.46 | 7.56 |
| Average | 136,610.80 | 146,313.59 | 7.12 |