Zero-Shot Monocular Motion Segmentation in the Wild by Combining Deep Learning with Geometric Motion Model Fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detecting and segmenting moving objects from a moving monocular camera is challenging in the presence of unknown camera motion, diverse object motions and complex scene structures. Most existing methods rely on a single motion cue to perform motion segmentation, which is usually insufficient when facing different complex environments. While a few recent deep learning based methods are able to combine multiple motion cues to achieve improved accuracy, they depend heavily on vast datasets and extensive annotations, making them less adaptable to new scenarios. To address these limitations, we propose a novel monocular dense segmentation method that achieves state-of-the-art motion segmentation results in a zero-shot manner. The proposed method synergestically combines the strengths of deep learning and geometric model fusion methods by performing geometric model fusion on object proposals. Experiments show that our method achieves competitive results on several motion segmentation datasets and even surpasses some state-of-the-art supervised methods on certain benchmarks, while not being trained on any data. We also present an ablation study to show the effectiveness of combining different geometric models together for motion segmentation, highlighting the value of our geometric model fusion strategy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".