Cited by 62Robotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationInertial Sensor and Navigation3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage

RD-VIO: Robust visual-inertial odometry for mobile augmented reality in dynamic environments

Open access
Li, Jinyu, Pan, Xiaokun, Huang, Gan, Zhang, Ziyang, Wang, Nan, Bao, Hujun, Zhang, Guofeng·2024·IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics

Abstract

It is typically challenging for visual or visual-inertial odometry systems to handle the problems of dynamic scenes and pure rotation. In this work, we design a novel visual-inertial odometry (VIO) system called RD-VIO to handle both of these two problems. First, we propose an IMU-PARSAC algorithm which can robustly detect and match keypoints in a two-stage process. In the first state, landmarks are matched with new keypoints using visual and IMU measurements. We collect statistical information from the matching and then guide the intra-keypoint matching in the second stage. Second, to handle the problem of pure rotation, we detect the motion type and adapt the deferred-triangulation technique during the data-association process. We make the pure-rotational frames into the special subframes. When solving the visual-inertial bundle adjustment, they provide additional constraints to the pure-rotational motion. We evaluate the proposed VIO system on public datasets and online comparison. Experiments show the proposed RD-VIO has obvious advantages over other methods in dynamic environments.

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/tvcg.2024.3353263

Cites

54 of 54 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?

  • RD-VIO incorporates radar data to leverage radar robustness under adverse weather for object tracking and localization.

    “RD-VIO [6] takes this further by incorporating radar data, leveraging radar's robustness under adverse weather conditions to enhance object tracking and localization.”

    From Multimodal fusion and vision–language models: A survey for robot vision (2026) · cites this paper as [6]

    The paper describes RD-VIO as a visual-inertial system: its opening description (p. 1) says it matches landmarks using visual and IMU measurements, and the Introduction (p. 2) describes its handling of moving objects and pure rotation. It does not describe incorporating radar or using radar’s adverse-weather robustness; the claimed sensing method is contrary to the one the paper presents. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Multimodal fusion combines complementary information from sensor inputs such as vision, language, depth, LiDAR, and tactile data, improving perception, reasoning, and decision-making in robot vision systems.

    “In contrast, multimodal fusion integrates complementary information from various sensor inputs (e.g., vision, language, depth, LiDAR, and tactile data), thereby enhancing the perception, reasoning, and decision-making capabilities of robot vision systems [4,5,6,7].”

    From Multimodal fusion and vision–language models: A survey for robot vision (2026) · cites this paper as [6]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says fusing visual and inertial information improves robustness in complex environments, and §2.1 (p. 2) says that fusion helps recover metric scale. The paper does not support the broader examples of language, depth, LiDAR, or tactile inputs, or the claimed improvements in reasoning and decision-making. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, J., Pan, X., Huang, G., Zhang, Z., Wang, N., Bao, H., & Zhang, G.
Affiliations
  • Zhejiang University (CN)
  • Sensetime (China) (CN)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics
Published
2024-10
Volume
30
Issue
10
Pages
6941-6955
ISSN
  • 1077-2626 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0506
  • 2160-9306
OpenAlex
W4390816654
Cited by
62
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 1
FWCI
10.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (61932003)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Robotics and Sensor-Based Localization
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Inertial Sensor and Navigation
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geology › 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Keywords
visual-inertial odometry, mobile augmented reality, dynamic environments, pure rotation, feature point matching, data association

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