MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796635488 · doi:10.1109/cvprw.2018.00064

Geometric Consistency for Self-Supervised End-to-End Visual Odometry

2018· preprint· en· W2796635488 on OpenAlexafffund
Ganesh Iyer, J. Krishna Murthy, Gunshi Gupta, K. Madhava Krishna, Liam Paull

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersCompute CanadaNvidia
KeywordsVisual odometryArtificial intelligenceOdometryComputer scienceDeep learningGround truthComputer visionLeverage (statistics)Inertial measurement unitGlobal Positioning SystemGeometric transformationConsistency (knowledge bases)Pipeline (software)RobotMobile robotImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the success of deep learning based approaches in tackling challenging problems in computer vision, a wide range of deep architectures have recently been proposed for the task of visual odometry (VO) estimation. Most of these proposed solutions rely on supervision, which requires the acquisition of precise ground-truth camera pose information, collected using expensive motion capture systems or high-precision IMU/GPS sensor rigs. In this work, we propose an unsupervised paradigm for deep visual odometry learning. We show that using a noisy teacher, which could be a standard VO pipeline, and by designing a loss term that enforces geometric consistency of the trajectory, we can train accurate deep models for VO that do not require ground-truth labels. We leverage geometry as a self-supervisory signal and propose "Composite Transformation Constraints (CTCs)", that automatically generate supervisory signals for training and enforce geometric consistency in the VO estimate. We also present a method of characterizing the uncertainty in VO estimates thus obtained. To evaluate our VO pipeline, we present exhaustive ablation studies that demonstrate the efficacy of end-to-end, self-supervised methodologies to train deep models for monocular VO. We show that leveraging concepts from geometry and incorporating them into the training of a recurrent neural network results in performance competitive to supervised deep VO methods.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207