Evolutionary Optimization for Robust Epipolar-Geometry Estimation and Outlier Detection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a robust technique based on a genetic algorithm is proposed for estimating two-view epipolar-geometry of uncalibrated perspective stereo images from putative correspondences containing a high percentage of outliers. The advantages of this technique are three-fold: (i) replacing random search with evolutionary search applying new strategies of encoding and guided sampling; (ii) robust and fast estimation of the epipolar geometry via detecting a more-than-enough set of inliers without making any assumptions about the probability distribution of the residuals; (iii) determining the inlier-outlier threshold based on the uncertainty of the estimated model. The proposed method was evaluated both on synthetic data and real images. The results were compared with the most popular techniques from the state-of-the-art, including RANSAC (random sample consensus), MSAC, MLESAC, Cov-RANSAC, LO-RANSAC, StaRSAC, Multi-GS RANSAC and least median of squares (LMedS). Experimental results showed that the proposed approach performed better than other methods regarding the accuracy of inlier detection and epipolar-geometry estimation, as well as the computational efficiency for datasets majorly contaminated by outliers and noise.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it