Cited by 25,893Image and Object Detection TechniquesAdvanced Vision and ImagingRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization

Random sample consensus: A paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography

Open access
Fischler, Martin A., Bolles, Robert C.·1981·Communications of the ACM

Abstract

A new paradigm, Random Sample Consensus (RANSAC), for fitting a model to experimental data is introduced. RANSAC is capable of interpreting/smoothing data containing a significant percentage of gross errors, and is thus ideally suited for applications in automated image analysis where interpretation is based on the data provided by error-prone feature detectors. A major portion of this paper describes the application of RANSAC to the Location Determination Problem (LDP): Given an image depicting a set of landmarks with known locations, determine that point in space from which the image was obtained. In response to a RANSAC requirement, new results are derived on the minimum number of landmarks needed to obtain a solution, and algorithms are presented for computing these minimum-landmark solutions in closed form. These results provide the basis for an automatic system that can solve the LDP under difficult viewing

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 · 10.1145/358669.358692

Cites

8 of 8 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?

  • RANSAC works better than LS method because RANSAC only needs to select a set of inliers to get a good model, instead of selecting all the data points.

    “RANSAC works better than LS method because RANSAC only needs to select a set of inliers to get a good model, instead of selecting all the data points.”

    From Nyquist Zone Index and Chirp Rate Estimation of LFM Signal Intercepted by Nyquist Folding Receiver Based on Random Sample Consensus and Fractional Fourier Transform (2019) · cites this paper as [25]

    Section II describes RANSAC fitting an initial model from a small subset and expanding it with consistent points, and the Experimental Results report a case where RANSAC succeeded after a least-squares pruning heuristic failed. The claim overstates this as general superiority over least squares: the paper demonstrates the advantage in the presence of gross errors and says least squares can refine a model once a consensus set is found. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Given supervision via anatomical landmarks, a camera pose can be estimated by applying a PnP solver to corresponding landmarks.

    “Given supervision via anatomical landmarks, a camera pose can be estimated by applying a PnP solver [19] to corresponding landmarks extracted from 2D intraoperative and 3D preoperative imaging.”
  • IP algorithms based on keypoint feature detectors present advantages compared to algorithms based on edge and corner detectors, given their invariance to perspective, scale and illumination changes.

    “As a general remark, IP algorithms based on keypoint features detectors present some advantages compared to algorithms based on edge and corner detectors, given their invariance to perspective, scale and illumination changes [34,41].”

    From Review of the robustness and applicability of monocular pose estimation systems for relative navigation with an uncooperative spacecraft (2019) · cites this paper as [34]

    The Introduction discusses errors made by local feature detectors, and Section III discusses matching image points to landmarks. Neither passage compares keypoint-based algorithms with edge- or corner-based algorithms or addresses invariance to perspective, scale, and illumination changes; searches for those terms found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Neural networks have been successfully applied as a robust solution to many computer vision problems due to their strength in generalizing from one dataset to another, but have rarely been used in space applications due to a perceived lack of confidence in their measurements.

    “Neural networks have been successfully applied as a robust solution to many computer vision problems due to their strength in generalizing from one dataset to another, but have rarely been used in space applications due to a perceived lack of confidence in their measurements [4].”

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Bolles, R.C., Quam, L.H., Fischler, M.A., and Wolf, H.C. The SRI road expert: Image to database correspondence. In Proc. Image Understanding Workshop, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Nov., 1978,
  2. Chrystal, G. Textbook of Algebra (Vol 1). Chelsea, New York, New York 1964, p. 415.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fischler, M. A., & Bolles, R. C.
Affiliations
SRI International (US)
Venue
Communications of the ACM
Published
1981-06
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
381-395
ISSN
  • 0001-0782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-7317
OpenAlex
W2085261163
Cited by
25,893
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 1256 · 2025: 1629 · 2024: 1627 · 2023: 1490 · 2022: 1328 · 2021: 1530 · 2020: 1340 · 2019: 1349 · 2018: 1326 · 2017: 1294 · 2016: 1213 · 2015: 1370 · 2014: 1278 · 2013: 1235 · 2012: 1084
FWCI
12.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Communications of the ACM (publishedVersion)
Funders
Advanced Research Projects Agency
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Object Detection Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Vision and Imaging
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Robotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Keywords
RANSAC, model fitting, gross errors, outlier removal, automated image analysis

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