MA-EVIO: A Motion-Aware Approach to Event-Based Visual–Inertial Odometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indoor localization remains a challenging task due to the unavailability of reliable global navigation satellite system (GNSS) signals in most indoor environments. One way to overcome this challenge is through visual-inertial odometry (VIO), which enables real-time pose estimation by fusing camera and inertial measurements. However, VIO suffers from performance degradation under high-speed motion and in poorly lit environments. In such scenarios, motion blur, sensor noise, and low temporal resolution reduce the accuracy and robustness of the estimated trajectory. To address these limitations, we propose a motion-aware event-based VIO (MA-EVIO) system that adaptively fuses asynchronous event data, frame-based imagery, and inertial measurements for robust and accurate pose estimation. MA-EVIO employs a hybrid tracking strategy combining sparse feature matching and direct photometric alignment. A key innovation is its motion-aware keyframe selection, which dynamically adjusts tracking parameters based on real-time motion classification and feature quality. This motion awareness also enables adaptive sensor fusion: during fast motion, the system prioritizes event data, while under slow or stable motion, it relies more on RGB frames and feature-based tracking. Experimental results on the DAVIS240c and VECtor benchmarks demonstrate that MA-EVIO outperforms state-of-the-art methods, achieving a lower mean position error (MPE) of 0.19 on DAVIS240c compared to 0.21 (EVI-SAM) and 0.24 (PL-EVIO), and superior performance on VECtor with MPE/mean rotation error (MRE) of 1.19%/1.28 deg/m versus 1.27%/1.42 deg/m (EVI-SAM) and 1.93%/1.56 deg/m (PL-EVIO). These results validate the effectiveness of MA-EVIO in challenging dynamic indoor environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".