MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403917867 · doi:10.1109/tci.2024.3488563

OccCasNet: Occlusion-Aware Cascade Cost Volume for Light Field Depth Estimation

2024· article· en· W4403917867 on OpenAlexaff
Wentao Chao, Fuqing Duan, Yingqian Wang, Ke Lü

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computational Imaging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect Detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCascadeVolume (thermodynamics)Computer scienceComputer visionField (mathematics)OcclusionEstimationArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMedicineEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depth estimation using the Light Field (LF) technique is an essential task with a wide range of practical applications. While mainstream approaches based on multi-view stereo techniques can attain exceptional accuracy by creating finer cost volumes, they are resource-intensive, time-consuming, and often overlook occlusion during cost volume construction. To address these issues and strike a better balance between accuracy and efficiency, we propose an occlusion-aware cascade cost volume for LF depth (disparity) estimation. Our cascaded strategy reduces the sampling number while maintaining a constant sampling interval, enabling the construction of a finer cost volume. We also introduce occlusion maps to enhance accuracy in constructing the occlusion-aware cost volume. Specifically, we first generate a coarse disparity map through a coarse disparity estimation network. Then, we warp the sub-aperture images (SAIs) of adjacent views to the center view based on the coarse disparity map to generate occlusion maps for each SAI by photo-consistency constraints. Finally, we seamlessly incorporate occlusion maps into cascade cost volume to construct an occlusion-aware refined cost volume, allowing the refined disparity estimation network to yield a more precise disparity map. Extensive experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of our method. Compared with the state-of-the-art techniques, our method achieves a superior balance between accuracy and efficiency, ranking first in the Q25 metric on the HCI 4D benchmark.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computational ImagingSame topicIndustrial Vision Systems and Defect DetectionFrench-language works237,207