PreprintCited by 345Advanced Vision and ImagingAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsImage Processing Techniques and Applications

Learning Depth with Convolutional Spatial Propagation Network

Open access
Cheng, Xinjing, Wang, Peng, Yang, Ruigang·2018·arXiv

Abstract

Depth prediction is one of the fundamental problems in computer vision. In this paper, we propose a simple yet effective convolutional spatial propagation network (CSPN) to learn the affinity matrix for various depth estimation tasks. Specifically, it is an efficient linear propagation model, in which the propagation is performed with a manner of recurrent convolutional operation, and the affinity among neighboring pixels is learned through a deep convolutional neural network (CNN). We can append this module to any output from a state-of-the-art (SOTA) depth estimation networks to improve their performances. In practice, we further extend CSPN in two aspects: 1) take sparse depth map as additional input, which is useful for the task of depth completion; 2) similar to commonly used 3D convolution operation in CNNs, we propose 3D CSPN to handle features with one additional dimension, which is effective in the task of stereo matching using 3D cost volume. For the tasks of sparse to dense, a.k.a depth completion. We experimented the proposed CPSN conjunct algorithms over the popular NYU v2 and KITTI datasets, where we show that our proposed algorithms not only produce high quality (e.g., 30% more reduction in depth error), but also run faster (e.g., 2 to 5x faster) than previous SOTA spatial propagation network. We also evaluated our stereo matching algorithm on the Scene Flow and KITTI Stereo datasets, and rank 1st on both the KITTI Stereo 2012 and 2015 benchmarks, which demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed module. The code of CSPN proposed in this work will be released at https://github.com/XinJCheng/CSPN.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1810.02695

Cites

99 of 99 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?

  • Traditional 3D object detection methods often use euclidean clustering or region-growing methods for grouping points into objects.

    “Traditional methods often use euclidean clustering [160] or region-growing methods [161] for grouping points into objects.”

    From A Survey of Autonomous Driving: <i>Common Practices and Emerging Technologies</i> (2020) · cites this paper as [160]

    The Related Work section discusses depth completion and stereo matching, not Euclidean clustering for grouping points into objects. Searches for Euclidean clustering, region growing, and 3D object-detection point grouping found no passage addressing the attributed claim. (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

6 of the 105 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. J. Biswas and M. Veloso, "Depth camera based localization and naviga- tion for indoor mobile robots," in RGB-D Workshop at RSS, vol. 2011, 2011, p. 21. 1
  2. X. Huang, X. Cheng, Q. Geng, B. Cao, D. Zhou, P. Wang, Y. Lin, and R. Yang, "The apolloscape dataset for autonomous driving," arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.06184, 2018. 1 · arXiv
  3. P. Wang, X. Shen, B. Russell, S. Cohen, B. L. Price, and A. L. Yuille, "SURGE: surface regularized geometry estimation from a single image," in NIPS, 2016. 2, 3, 9
  4. L.-C. Chen, G. Papandreou, F. Schroff, and H. Adam, "Rethinking atrous convolution for semantic image segmentation," arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.05587, 2017. 3 · arXiv
  5. S. A. Gershgorin, "Uber die abgrenzung der eigenwerte einer matrix," . , no. 6, pp. 749-754, 1931. 4

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, X., Wang, P., & Yang, R.
Affiliations
Baidu (China) (CN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2018
Volume
42
Issue
10
Pages
2361-2379
ISSN
0162-8828 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2980467688
Cited by
345
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 57 · 2022: 57 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 1
FWCI
17.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Baidu
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Vision and Imaging
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Image Processing Techniques and Applications
Keywords
depth estimation, depth completion, stereo matching, spatial pyramid pooling, 3D convolution

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