computer vision

Image Matching Filtering and Refinement by Planes and Beyond

arXiv:2411.09484

summary

The paper evaluates state‑of‑the‑art filtering and refinement techniques for image matching, introduces a new method that combines planar constraints with cross‑correlation, and shows it can compete with recent deep learning approaches, even when camera intrinsics are unavailable.

Abstract

This paper provides a consistent and extensive evaluation of state-of-the-art filtering and refinement methods on common image matching pipelines. Unlike previous comparisons, the designed benchmark also takes into account the more general, real, and practical cases where camera intrinsics are unavailable. Moreover, a novel and effective strategy combining non-deep traditional computer vision approaches based on planar constraints and cross correlation is presented. Experimental analysis provides several insights for current application design and future research directions. In particular, the choice of a proper evaluation protocol discloses the effective differences within the compared solutions which otherwise would tend to flatten. Moreover, the proposed classical algorithmic approach is competitive with recent deep methods. Besides providing robust baseline using traditional computer vision for the evaluation of deep-based methods, this knowledge is useful to improve and better understand the deep image matching architectures. On one hand, geometry-based filtering is effective in presence of outliers without degrading already robust deep pipelines; on the other hand cross-correlation refinement is valid in the case of corner-like keypoints and allows to not directly discard inaccurate matches by default in deep pipelines but to retain and refine them for achieving a better coverage of the scene.

project page: https://github.com/fb82/MiHo

Topics & keywords

#image matching#filtering#refinement#planar constraints#cross-correlation#benchmark evaluationgeometry‑based filteringcross‑correlation refinementcamera intrinsics‑freetraditional vs deep methodsevaluation protocol