Modeling Stereo-Confidence out of the End-to-End Stereo-Matching Network via Disparity Plane Sweep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a novel stereo-confidence that can be measured externally to various stereo-matching networks, offering an alternative input modality choice of the cost volume for learning-based approaches, especially in safety-critical systems. Grounded in the foundational concepts of disparity definition and the disparity plane sweep, the proposed stereo-confidence method is built upon the idea that any shift in a stereo-image pair should be updated in a corresponding amount shift in the disparity map. Based on this idea, the proposed stereo-confidence method can be summarized in three folds. 1) Using the disparity plane sweep, multiple disparity maps can be obtained and treated as a 3-D volume (predicted disparity volume), like the cost volume is constructed. 2) One of these disparity maps serves as an anchor, allowing us to define a desirable (or ideal) disparity profile at every spatial point. 3) By comparing the desirable and predicted disparity profiles, we can quantify the level of matching ambiguity between left and right images for confidence measurement. Extensive experimental results using various stereo-matching networks and datasets demonstrate that the proposed stereo-confidence method not only shows competitive performance on its own but also consistent performance improvements when it is used as an input modality for learning-based stereo-confidence 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 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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".