MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088246117 · doi:10.3390/rs12193138

Stereo Dense Image Matching by Adaptive Fusion of Multiple-Window Matching Results

2020· article· en· W3088246117 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yilong Han, Wei Liu, Xu Huang, Shugen Wang, Rongjun Qin

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Vision and Imaging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIntelligence Advanced Research Projects ActivityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilYork UniversityJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsMatching (statistics)Window (computing)Computer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Artificial intelligenceSmoothnessPattern recognition (psychology)PixelImage (mathematics)AlgorithmFusionTemplate matching3-dimensional matchingBlossom algorithmComputer visionMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional stereo dense image matching (DIM) methods normally predefine a fixed window to compute matching cost, while their performances are limited by the matching window sizes. A large matching window usually achieves robust matching results in weak-textured regions, while it may cause over-smoothness problems in disparity jumps and fine structures. A small window can recover sharp boundaries and fine structures, while it contains high matching uncertainties in weak-textured regions. To address the issue above, we respectively compute matching results with different matching window sizes and then proposes an adaptive fusion method of these matching results so that a better matching result can be generated. The core algorithm designs a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) to predict the probabilities of large and small windows for each pixel and then refines these probabilities by imposing a global energy function. A compromised solution of the global energy function is utilized by breaking the optimization into sub-optimizations of each pixel in one-dimensional (1D) paths. Finally, the matching results of large and small windows are fused by taking the refined probabilities as weights for more accurate matching. We test our method on aerial image datasets, satellite image datasets, and Middlebury benchmark with different matching cost metrics. Experiments show that our proposed adaptive fusion of multiple-window matching results method has a good transferability across different datasets and outperforms the small windows, the median windows, the large windows, and some state-of-the-art matching window selection 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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicAdvanced Vision and ImagingFrench-language works237,207