2017 Fifteenth IAPR International Conference on Machine Vision Applications (MVA) 2017
DOI: 10.23919/mva.2017.7986850
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High accuracy local stereo matching using DoG scale map

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results in Table 7 show that our approach gives average absolute errors in non-occluded regions equal to 9.76% and average absolute errors in all regions equal to 17.6%. The total execution time of our proposed algorithm is 0.27 s. These results indicate that our approach is more accurate and faster than DoGGuided [33], BSM [34], ICSG [35], and SGBM1 [36]. SPS [32] produces more accurate results over all regions (16.6%) but its results are less accurate in non-occluded regions (10.4%).…”
Section: Implementation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The results in Table 7 show that our approach gives average absolute errors in non-occluded regions equal to 9.76% and average absolute errors in all regions equal to 17.6%. The total execution time of our proposed algorithm is 0.27 s. These results indicate that our approach is more accurate and faster than DoGGuided [33], BSM [34], ICSG [35], and SGBM1 [36]. SPS [32] produces more accurate results over all regions (16.6%) but its results are less accurate in non-occluded regions (10.4%).…”
Section: Implementation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…The obtained results are detailed in Tables 4 and 5, which respectively show the error for each stereo pair on non occluded and all regions. The evaluation on MV3 indicates that our proposed approach outperforms other algorithms such as DoGGuided [33] that use a guided filter based on the response of the difference of Gaussian, binary stereo matching (BSM) [34] and other recent approaches. In addition our stereo matching algorithm is more accurate than ICSG [35] and semi global matching (SGBM1) [36].…”
Section: Experimental Results and Analysismentioning
confidence: 98%
“…In addition, it can be seen that our algorithm also achieves better performance than ISM [19], and our average error rate as well as the average disparity error are respectively 10.8% and 2.81 px lower than ISM. Obviously, our method also outperforms the remaining four non-learning stereo methods such as DoGGuided [45] by a large margin. As illustrated in Fig.4, Bicycle2, Classroom2, Computer, Crusade and Newkuba in the test set of the Middlebury dataset v3 are used for visual comparison.…”
Section: B Evaluation On Middlebury Dataset V3mentioning
confidence: 86%
“…We have compared our results with recently published methods (i.e. [4–8 ]) to show the competitiveness of the proposed method in this Letter. Their method were developed with different framework architectures including the deep learning method in [9 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 94%