An Adaptive Refinement Scheme for Depth Estimation Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep learning has proved to be a breakthrough in depth generation. However, the generalization ability of deep networks is still limited, and they cannot maintain a satisfactory performance on some inputs. By addressing a similar problem in the segmentation field, a feature backpropagating refinement scheme (f-BRS) has been proposed to refine predictions in the inference time. f-BRS adapts an intermediate activation function to each input by using user clicks as sparse labels. Given the similarity between user clicks and sparse depth maps, this paper aims to extend the application of f-BRS to depth prediction. Our experiments show that f-BRS, fused with a depth estimation baseline, is trapped in local optima, and fails to improve the network predictions. To resolve that, we propose a double-stage adaptive refinement scheme (DARS). In the first stage, a Delaunay-based correction module significantly improves the depth generated by a baseline network. In the second stage, a particle swarm optimizer (PSO) delineates the estimation through fine-tuning f-BRS parameters-that is, scales and biases. DARS is evaluated on an outdoor benchmark, KITTI, and an indoor benchmark, NYUv2, while for both, the network is pre-trained on KITTI. The proposed scheme was effective on both datasets.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".