A Self-Supervised, Differentiable Kalman Filter for Uncertainty-Aware Visual-Inertial Odometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual-inertial odometry (VIO) systems traditionally rely on filtering or optimization-based techniques for egomotion estimation. While these methods are accurate under nominal conditions, they are prone to failure during severe illumination changes, rapid camera motions, or on low-texture image sequences. Learning-based systems have the potential to outperform classical implementations in challenging environments, but, currently, do not perform as well as classical methods in nominal settings. Herein, we introduce a framework for training a hybrid VIO system that leverages the advantages of learning and standard filtering-based state estimation. Our approach is built upon a differentiable Kalman filter, with an IMU-driven process model and a robust, neural network-derived relative pose measurement model. The use of the Kalman filter framework enables the principled treatment of uncertainty at training time and at test time. We show that our self-supervised loss formulation outperforms a similar, supervised method, while also enabling online retraining. We evaluate our system on a visually degraded version of the EuRoC dataset and find that our estimator operates without a significant reduction in accuracy in cases where classical estimators consistently diverge. Finally, by properly utilizing the metric information contained in the IMU measurements, our system is able to recover metric scene scale, while other self-supervised monocular VIO approaches cannot.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".