arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2403.02043eess.IVcs.CV

利用4D几何线索的迭代式遮挡感知光场深度估计

Iterative Occlusion-Aware Light Field Depth Estimation using 4D Geometrical Cues

Instituto de Telecomunicações, Portugal(葡萄牙电信研究所);ESTG - Polytechnic University of Leiria(莱里亚理工学院);PEE, COPPE, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro(里约热内卢联邦大学)

Rui Lourenço, Lucas Thomaz, Eduardo A. B. Silva, Sergio M. M. Faria

AI总结:

提出一种非学习的迭代遮挡感知光场深度估计方法,利用可解释4D几何模型分析平面方向与相交,显著提升表面法线角度精度。

摘要:

光场相机和多相机阵列已成为通过被动捕获光信息来精确估计深度的有前景方案。这之所以可行,是因为场景的3D信息嵌入在4D光场几何中。通常,深度估计方法依赖梯度信息、基于启发式的优化模型或基于学习的方法来提取该信息。本文主要关注显式理解并利用4D几何线索进行光场深度估计。因此,提出了一种新颖方法,该方法基于用于深度估计的非学习优化方法,通过利用完全可解释的光场4D几何模型,显式考虑表面法线精度和遮挡区域。该4D模型通过确定4D空间中关键2D平面的方向并分析其相交来执行深度/视差估计,这些平面是3D空间点在4D光场中的图像。实验结果表明,所提方法在表面法线角度精度方面优于基于学习和非基于学习的SOTA方法,在平面表面上实现的中位角度误差平均比SOTA低26.3%,并且在MSE × 100和Badpix 0.07方面仍与SOTA方法具有竞争力。

英文摘要:

Light field cameras and multi-camera arrays have emerged as promising solutions for accurately estimating depth by passively capturing light information. This is possible because the 3D information of a scene is embedded in the 4D light field geometry. Commonly, depth estimation methods extract this information relying on gradient information, heuristic-based optimisation models, or learning-based approaches. This paper focuses mainly on explicitly understanding and exploiting 4D geometrical cues for light field depth estimation. Thus, a novel method is proposed, based on a non-learning-based optimisation approach for depth estimation that explicitly considers surface normal accuracy and occlusion regions by utilising a fully explainable 4D geometric model of the light field. The 4D model performs depth/disparity estimation by determining the orientations and analysing the intersections of key 2D planes in 4D space, which are the images of 3D-space points in the 4D light field. Experimental results show that the proposed method outperforms both learning-based and non-learning-based state-of-the-art methods in terms of surface normal angle accuracy, achieving a Median Angle Error on planar surfaces, on average, 26.3$\%$ lower than the state-of-the-art, and still being competitive with state-of-the-art methods in terms of MSE ${\times}$ 100 and Badpix 0.07.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑