2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) 2015
DOI: 10.1109/iccv.2015.117
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Deep Visual Correspondence Embedding Model for Stereo Matching Costs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
142
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 205 publications
(142 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
142
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As a result, the receptive field is restricted to a relatively small size. For example, the patch sizes in [1], [3], [5] are 9 × 9, 11 × 11 and 13 × 13, respectively. They are prone to be ambiguous and produce a noisy matching cost in weakly-textured areas due to limited local context information.…”
Section: Feature Ensemble Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As a result, the receptive field is restricted to a relatively small size. For example, the patch sizes in [1], [3], [5] are 9 × 9, 11 × 11 and 13 × 13, respectively. They are prone to be ambiguous and produce a noisy matching cost in weakly-textured areas due to limited local context information.…”
Section: Feature Ensemble Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Luo et al [5] improved the architecture by means of treating it as a multi-label classification problem, in which the labels were all possible disparities. Chen et al [3] computed two similarity scores separately based on the multi-scale patch pairs and then a fusion was made for the final decision.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Cross-based cost aggregation and semi-global matching are preformed for the obtained cost-volume to produce accurate disparity map. To speed up computing the matching cost, Chen et al [11] and Luo et al [23] proposed similar ideas, where the matching cost is defined as the inner product of two features from CNN. In FlowNet [13], the matching costs are defined as the correlation between two patches of feature maps, and the final flow map is obtained by upconvolution operation.…”
Section: Cost Aggregation Methods For Labeling Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, Zhan et al [48] proposed some techniques for local stereo matching methods to improve the accuracy: mask filtering as a pre-processing, an improved matching cost function, and multi-step disparity refinement as a post-processing. Inspired by the great success of convolutional neural networks (CNNs) in image recognition task, CNNs are recently used for computing the label costs (matching costs in stereo matching and optical flow estimation) instead of hand-crafted cost functions [11,13,23,46,47], which has led to significant improvement in terms of accuracy. In MC-CNN [46,47], the CNN directly outputs the matching cost of two input patches.…”
Section: Cost Aggregation Methods For Labeling Problemsmentioning
confidence: 99%