MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112780013 · doi:10.1109/crv.2014.10

Towards Estimating Bias in Stereo Visual Odometry

2014· article· en· W2112780013 on OpenAlexafffund
Sara Farboud-Sheshdeh, Timothy D. Barfoot, R.H. Kwong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJet Propulsion Laboratory
KeywordsVisual odometryComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceOdometryMonte Carlo methodPosition (finance)Computer visionGlobal Positioning SystemAlgorithmMathematicsRobotStatisticsMobile robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stereo visual odometry (VO) is a common technique for estimating a camera's motion, features are tracked across frames and the pose change is subsequently inferred. This position estimation method can play a particularly important role in environments in which the global positioning system (GPS) is not available (e.g., Mars rovers). Recently, some authors have noticed a bias in VO position estimates that grows with distance travelled, this can cause the resulting position estimate to become highly inaccurate. The goals of this paper are (i) to investigate the nature of this bias in VO, (ii) to propose methods of estimating it, and (iii) to provide a correction that can potentially be used online. We identify two effects at play in stereo VO bias: first, the inherent bias in the maximum-likelihood estimation framework, and second, the disparity threshold used to discard far-away and erroneous stereo observations. In order to estimate the bias, we investigate three methods: Monte Carlo sampling, the sigma-point method (with modification), and an existing analytical method in the literature. Based on simulations, we show that our new sigma point method achieves similar accuracy to Monte Carlo, but at a fraction of the computational cost. Finally, we develop a bias correction algorithm by adapting the idea of the bootstrap in statistics, and demonstrate that our bias correction algorithm is capable of reducing approximately 95% of bias in VO problems without incorporating other sensors into the setup.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207