Sensitivity study for feature-based monocular 3D SLAM

Advances in cameras and computing hardware, both in terms of performance and miniaturization, has made vision-based localization a feasible sensor for aerial vehicles. In GPS deprived environments or scenarios where the resolution of GPS is not sufficient, such a sensor presents an attractive alternative. Vision-based position sensors typically estimate their pose by tracking natural features in the environment, while at the same time creating a map of those features. This process is referred to as simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM), and it employs several sub-processes, such as feature detection and description, map generation, feature mapping, and optimization, each of which is subject to a large number of parameters. Due to the complexity of the problem, finding a satisfactory parameter setting can be a tedious task. In this paper we investigate the effects of each parameter in the context of SLAM. As an example we use the PTAM (Parallel Tracking and Mapping) algorithm from the University of Oxford. The results of this sensitivity study indicate which parameters are most influential in achieving good tracking performance and also show suitable ranges for each parameter. This information can be used to expedite discovery of a satisfactory parameter setting for a new environment.

[1]  David G. Lowe,et al.  Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints , 2004, International Journal of Computer Vision.

[2]  B. Ripley,et al.  Robust Statistics , 2018, Encyclopedia of Mathematical Geosciences.

[3]  John Vian,et al.  Aggressive navigation using high-speed natural feature point tracking , 2014, 2014 IEEE Aerospace Conference.

[4]  Illah R. Nourbakhsh,et al.  Techniques for evaluating optical flow for visual odometry in extreme terrain , 2004, 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37566).

[5]  Tom Drummond,et al.  Machine Learning for High-Speed Corner Detection , 2006, ECCV.

[6]  Matthijs C. Dorst.  Distinctive Image Features from Scale-Invariant Keypoints , 2011 .

[7]  James R. Bergen,et al.  Visual odometry , 2004, Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2004. CVPR 2004..

[8]  Christopher G. Harris,et al.  A Combined Corner and Edge Detector , 1988, Alvey Vision Conference.

[9]  David W. Murray,et al.  Parallel Tracking and Mapping on a camera phone , 2009, 2009 8th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality.

[10]  Roland Siegwart,et al.  Real-time onboard visual-inertial state estimation and self-calibration of MAVs in unknown environments , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[11]  Sanjiv Singh,et al.  Motion Estimation from Image and Inertial Measurements , 2004, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[12]  Roland Siegwart,et al.  Real-time monocular visual odometry for on-road vehicles with 1-point RANSAC , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[13]  Carlo Tomasi,et al.  Good features to track , 1994, 1994 Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[14]  G. Klein,et al.  Parallel Tracking and Mapping for Small AR Workspaces , 2007, 2007 6th IEEE and ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality.

[15]  Roland Siegwart,et al.  BRISK: Binary Robust invariant scalable keypoints , 2011, 2011 International Conference on Computer Vision.