Comparison of approaches to egomotion computation

We evaluated six algorithms for computing egomotion from image velocities. We established benchmarks for quantifying bias and sensitivity to noise, and for quantifying the convergence properties of those algorithms that require numerical search. Our simulation results reveal some interesting and surprising results. First, it is often written in the literature that the egomotion problem is difficult because translation (e.g., along the X-axis) and rotation (e.g., about the Y-axis) produce similar image velocities. We found, to the contrary, that the bias and sensitivity of our six algorithms are totally invariant with respect to the axis of rotation. Second, it is also believed by some that fixating helps to make the egomotion problem easier: We found, to the contrary, that fixating does not help when the noise is independent of the image velocities. Fixation does help if the noise is proportional to speed, but this is only for the trivial reason that the speeds are slower under fixation. Third, it is widely believed that increasing the field of view will yield better performance. We found, to the contrary, that this is not necessarily true.

[1]  Narendra Ahuja,et al.  Optimal motion and structure estimation , 1989, Proceedings CVPR '89: IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[2]  Carlo Tomasi,et al.  Direction of heading from image deformations , 1993, Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[3]  K. Prazdny Determining The Instantaneous Direction Of Motion From Optical Flow Generated By A Curvilinearly Moving Observer , 1981, Other Conferences.

[4]  Chuan Yi Tang,et al.  A 2.|E|-Bit Distributed Algorithm for the Directed Euler Trail Problem , 1993, Inf. Process. Lett..

[5]  Ellen C. Hildreth,et al.  Recovering heading for visually-guided navigation , 1992, Vision Research.

[6]  Axel Ruhe,et al.  Algorithms for separable nonlinear least squares problems , 1980 .

[7]  J H Rieger,et al.  Processing differential image motion. , 1985, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[8]  J HeegerDavid,et al.  Subspace methods for recovering rigid motion I , 1992 .

[9]  Shenchang Eric Chen,et al.  QuickTime VR: an image-based approach to virtual environment navigation , 1995, SIGGRAPH.

[10]  Thomas S. Huang,et al.  Uniqueness and Estimation of Three-Dimensional Motion Parameters of Rigid Objects with Curved Surfaces , 1984, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence.

[11]  Narendra Ahuja,et al.  Motion and Structure From Two Perspective Views: Algorithms, Error Analysis, and Error Estimation , 1989, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[12]  W. James MacLean,et al.  Recovery of Egomotion and Segmentation of Independent Object Motion Using the EM Algorithm , 1994, BMVC.

[13]  Berthold K. P. Horn,et al.  Passive navigation , 1982, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[14]  Allan D. Jepson,et al.  Linear subspace methods for recovering translational direction , 1994 .

[15]  Leonard McMillan,et al.  Plenoptic Modeling: An Image-Based Rendering System , 2023 .

[16]  H. C. Longuet-Higgins,et al.  A computer algorithm for reconstructing a scene from two projections , 1981, Nature.

[17]  A. Jepson,et al.  A fast subspace algorithm for recovering rigid motion , 1991, Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Visual Motion.

[18]  K. Prazdny,et al.  On the information in optical flows , 1983, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..

[19]  S. Maybank,et al.  The angular Velocity associated with the optical flowfield arising from motion through a rigid environment , 1985, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences.

[20]  Xinhua Zhuang,et al.  A simplified linear optic flow-motion algorithm , 1988, Comput. Vis. Graph. Image Process..