Cited by 215Advanced Neural Network ApplicationsRobot Manipulation and Learning3D Shape Modeling and Analysis

3D Pose Regression Using Convolutional Neural Networks

Open access
Mahendran, Siddharth, Ali, Haider, Vidal, Rene·2017·2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW)

Abstract

3D pose estimation is a key component of many important computer vision tasks such as autonomous navigation and 3D scene understanding. Most state-of-the-art approaches to 3D pose estimation solve this problem as a pose-classification problem in which the pose space is discretized into bins and a CNN classifier is used to predict a pose bin. We argue that the 3D pose space is continuous and propose to solve the pose estimation problem in a CNN regression framework with a suitable representation, data augmentation and loss function that captures the geometry of the pose space. Experiments on PASCAL3D+ show that the proposed 3D pose regression approach achieves competitive performance compared to the state-of-the-art.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvprw.2017.73

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Geodesic loss L_geo is convex with respect to pose transformations.

    “Geodesic loss, L geo , which is the square of the geodesic distance in SE(3), has been studied for registration problems due to its convexity with respect to pose transformations [32] [33].”

    From A Fully Differentiable Framework for 2D/3D Registration and the Projective Spatial Transformers (2024) · cites this paper as [33]

    In §3.4 (page unavailable), the paper says its geodesic-loss optimization encounters bad local minima and uses an initial MSE phase to avoid them, contrary to the claimed convexity. The paper discusses a loss on rotations in SO(3), not a squared geodesic distance in SE(3). (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • L2 distances to quaternions near the equator do not express the geodesic distance.

    “Quaternions, for example, are non-injective. While one can map quaternions to lie only on one hemisphere as in [38], L 2 distances to quaternions near the equator will still not express the geodesic distance.”
  • Using adaptive weighting based on Laplace likelihood [38] achieved poor results.

    “It is worth noting that we have experimented using the adaptive weighting based on Laplace likelihood in [38] but achieved poor results.”

    From Deep Learning for Spacecraft Pose Estimation from Photorealistic Rendering (2020) · cites this paper as [38]

    The citation identifies the purported adaptive-weighting method; the citing authors describe the poor results as their own. In §3.4 (page unavailable), the source describes a loss weighted by the number of images per category, but our copy does not identify it as adaptive weighting based on a Laplace likelihood. Searches for “adaptive weighting” and “Laplace likelihood” found no passage establishing that identification. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 24 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. N. A. Nystrom, M. J. Levine, R. Z. Roskies, and J. R. Scott. Bridges: A uniquely flexible hpc resource for new communities and data analytics. In Proceed- ings of the 2015 XSEDE Conference: Scientific Ad- vancements Enabled by Enhanced Cyberinfrastruc- ture, XSEDE '15, pages 30:1-30:8, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mahendran, S., Ali, H., & Vidal, R.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Venue
2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2017-07
Pages
494-495
OpenAlex
W2737704667
Cited by
210
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 32 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 1
FWCI
7.60
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) (publishedVersion)
  • IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1527340, 1053575, 1445606)
  • Maryland Advanced Research Computing Center
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Keywords
3D pose estimation, object pose estimation, data augmentation, loss function design

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review