MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414929906 · doi:10.1109/iccv51701.2025.00757

One Look is Enough: Seamless Patchwise Refinement for Zero-Shot Monocular Depth Estimation on High-Resolution Images

2025· article· en· W4414929906 on OpenAlexaff
Byeongjun Kwon, Munchurl Kim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicImage Processing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUpsamplingOverfittingInferenceConsistency (knowledge bases)Ground truthGeneralizationMonocularDepth mapClassification of discontinuities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zero-shot depth estimation (DE) models exhibit strong generalization performance as they are trained on large-scale datasets. However, existing models struggle with high-resolution images due to the discrepancy in image resolutions of training (with smaller resolutions) and inference (for high resolutions). Processing them at full resolution leads to decreased estimation accuracy on depth with tremendous memory consumption, while downsampling to the training resolution results in blurred edges in the estimated depth images. Prevailing high-resolution depth estimation methods adopt a patch-based approach, which introduces depth discontinuity issues when reassembling the estimated depth patches, resulting in test-time inefficiency. Additionally, to obtain fine-grained depth details, these methods rely on synthetic datasets due to the real-world sparse ground truth depth, leading to poor generalizability. To tackle these limitations, we propose Patch Refine Once (PRO), an efficient and generalizable tile-based framework. Our PRO consists of two key components: (i) Grouped Patch Consistency Training that enhances test-time efficiency while mitigating the depth discontinuity problem by jointly processing four overlapping patches and enforcing a consistency loss on their overlapping regions within a single backpropagation step, and (ii) Bias Free Masking that prevents the DE models from overfitting to dataset-specific biases, enabling better generalization to real-world datasets even after training on synthetic data. Zero-shot evaluations on Booster, ETH3D, Middlebury 2014, and NuScenes demonstrate that our PRO can be seamlessly integrated into existing depth estimation models.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.640
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207