mirror of
https://github.com/opencv/opencv.git
synced 2024-12-04 00:39:11 +08:00
308 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
308 lines
14 KiB
Markdown
|
---
|
|||
|
author:
|
|||
|
- Maksym Ivashechkin
|
|||
|
bibliography: 'bibs.bib'
|
|||
|
csl: 'acm-sigchi-proceedings.csl'
|
|||
|
date: August 2020
|
|||
|
title: 'Google Summer of Code: Improvement of Random Sample Consensus in OpenCV'
|
|||
|
...
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Contribution
|
|||
|
============
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
The integrated part to OpenCV `calib3d` module is RANSAC-based universal
|
|||
|
framework USAC (`namespace usac`) written in C++. The framework includes
|
|||
|
different state-of-the-arts methods for sampling, verification or local
|
|||
|
optimization. The main advantage of the framework is its independence to
|
|||
|
any estimation problem and modular structure. Therefore, new solvers or
|
|||
|
methods can be added/removed easily. So far it includes the following
|
|||
|
components:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Sampling method:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Uniform – standard RANSAC sampling proposed in \[8\] which draw
|
|||
|
minimal subset independently uniformly at random. *The default
|
|||
|
option in proposed framework*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. PROSAC – method \[4\] that assumes input data points sorted by
|
|||
|
quality so sampling can start from the most promising points.
|
|||
|
Correspondences for this method can be sorted e.g., by ratio of
|
|||
|
descriptor distances of the best to second match obtained from
|
|||
|
SIFT detector. *This is method is recommended to use because it
|
|||
|
can find good model and terminate much earlier*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. NAPSAC – sampling method \[10\] which takes initial point
|
|||
|
uniformly at random and the rest of points for minimal sample in
|
|||
|
the neighborhood of initial point. This is method can be
|
|||
|
potentially useful when models are localized. For example, for
|
|||
|
plane fitting. However, in practise struggles from degenerate
|
|||
|
issues and defining optimal neighborhood size.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. Progressive-NAPSAC – sampler \[2\] which is similar to NAPSAC,
|
|||
|
although it starts from local and gradually converges to
|
|||
|
global sampling. This method can be quite useful if local models
|
|||
|
are expected but distribution of data can be arbitrary. The
|
|||
|
implemented version assumes data points to be sorted by quality
|
|||
|
as in PROSAC.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Score Method. USAC as well as standard RANSAC finds model which
|
|||
|
minimizes total loss. Loss can be represented by following
|
|||
|
functions:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. RANSAC – binary 0 / 1 loss. 1 for outlier, 0 for inlier. *Good
|
|||
|
option if the goal is to find as many inliers as possible.*
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. MSAC – truncated squared error distance of point to model. *The
|
|||
|
default option in framework*. The model might not have as many
|
|||
|
inliers as using RANSAC score, however will be more accurate.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. MAGSAC – threshold-free method \[3\] to compute score. Using,
|
|||
|
although, maximum sigma (standard deviation of noise) level to
|
|||
|
marginalize residual of point over sigma. Score of the point
|
|||
|
represents likelihood of point being inlier. *Recommended option
|
|||
|
when image noise is unknown since method does not require
|
|||
|
threshold*. However, it is still recommended to provide at least
|
|||
|
approximated threshold, because termination itself is based on
|
|||
|
number of points which error is less than threshold. By giving 0
|
|||
|
threshold the method will output model after maximum number of
|
|||
|
iterations reached.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. LMeds – the least median of squared error distances. In the
|
|||
|
framework finding median is efficiently implement with $O(n)$
|
|||
|
complexity using quick-sort algorithm. Note, LMeds does not have
|
|||
|
to work properly when inlier ratio is less than 50%, in other
|
|||
|
cases this method is robust and does not require threshold.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Error metric which describes error distance of point to
|
|||
|
estimated model.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Re-projection distance – used for affine, homography and
|
|||
|
projection matrices. For homography also symmetric re-projection
|
|||
|
distance can be used.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Sampson distance – used for Fundamental matrix.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Symmetric Geometric distance – used for Essential matrix.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. Degeneracy:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. DEGENSAC – method \[7\] which for Fundamental matrix estimation
|
|||
|
efficiently verifies and recovers model which has at least 5
|
|||
|
points in minimal sample lying on the dominant plane.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Collinearity test – for affine and homography matrix estimation
|
|||
|
checks if no 3 points lying on the line. For homography matrix
|
|||
|
since points are planar is applied test which checks if points
|
|||
|
in minimal sample lie on the same side w.r.t. to any line
|
|||
|
crossing any two points in sample (does not assume reflection).
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Oriented epipolar constraint – method \[6\] for epipolar
|
|||
|
geometry which verifies model (fundamental and essential matrix)
|
|||
|
to have points visible in the front of the camera.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5. SPRT verification – method \[9\] which verifies model by its
|
|||
|
evaluation on randomly shuffled points using statistical properties
|
|||
|
given by probability of inlier, relative time for estimation,
|
|||
|
average number of output models etc. Significantly speeding up
|
|||
|
framework, because bad model can be rejected very quickly without
|
|||
|
explicitly computing error for every point.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
6. Local Optimization:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Locally Optimized RANSAC – method \[5\] that iteratively
|
|||
|
improves so-far-the-best model by non-minimal estimation. *The
|
|||
|
default option in framework. This procedure is the fastest and
|
|||
|
not worse than others local optimization methods.*
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Graph-Cut RANSAC – method \[1\] that refine so-far-the-best
|
|||
|
model, however, it exploits spatial coherence of the
|
|||
|
data points. *This procedure is quite precise however
|
|||
|
computationally slower.*
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Sigma Consensus – method \[3\] which improves model by applying
|
|||
|
non-minimal weighted estimation, where weights are computed with
|
|||
|
the same logic as in MAGSAC score. This method is better to use
|
|||
|
together with MAGSAC score.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7. Termination:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Standard – standard equation for independent and
|
|||
|
uniform sampling.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. PROSAC – termination for PROSAC.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. SPRT – termination for SPRT.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
8. Solver. In the framework there are minimal and non-minimal solvers.
|
|||
|
In minimal solver standard methods for estimation is applied. In
|
|||
|
non-minimal solver usually the covariance matrix is built and the
|
|||
|
model is found as the eigen vector corresponding to the highest
|
|||
|
eigen value.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. Affine2D matrix
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. Homography matrix – for minimal solver is used RHO
|
|||
|
(Gaussian elimination) algorithm from OpenCV.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. Fundamental matrix – for 7-points algorithm two null vectors are
|
|||
|
found using Gaussian elimination (eliminating to upper
|
|||
|
triangular matrix and back-substitution) instead of SVD and then
|
|||
|
solving 3-degrees polynomial. For 8-points solver Gaussian
|
|||
|
elimination is used too.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. Essential matrix – 4 null vectors are found using
|
|||
|
Gaussian elimination. Then the solver based on Gröbner basis
|
|||
|
described in \[11\] is used. Essential matrix can be computed
|
|||
|
only if <span style="font-variant:small-caps;">LAPACK</span> or
|
|||
|
<span style="font-variant:small-caps;">Eigen</span> are
|
|||
|
installed as it requires eigen decomposition with complex
|
|||
|
eigen values.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5. Perspective-n-Point – the minimal solver is classical 3 points
|
|||
|
with up to 4 solutions. For RANSAC the low number of sample size
|
|||
|
plays significant role as it requires less iterations,
|
|||
|
furthermore in average P3P solver has around 1.39
|
|||
|
estimated models. Also, in new version of `solvePnPRansac(...)`
|
|||
|
with `UsacParams` there is an options to pass empty intrinsic
|
|||
|
matrix `InputOutputArray cameraMatrix`. If matrix is empty than
|
|||
|
using Direct Linear Transformation algorithm (PnP with 6 points)
|
|||
|
framework outputs not only rotation and translation vector but
|
|||
|
also calibration matrix.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Also, the framework can be run in parallel. The parallelization is done
|
|||
|
in the way that multiple RANSACs are created and they share two atomic
|
|||
|
variables `bool success` and `int num_hypothesis_tested` which
|
|||
|
determines when all RANSACs must terminate. If one of RANSAC terminated
|
|||
|
successfully then all other RANSAC will terminate as well. In the end
|
|||
|
the best model is synchronized from all threads. If PROSAC sampler is
|
|||
|
used then threads must share the same sampler since sampling is done
|
|||
|
sequentially. However, using default options of framework parallel
|
|||
|
RANSAC is not deterministic since it depends on how often each thread is
|
|||
|
running. The easiest way to make it deterministic is using PROSAC
|
|||
|
sampler without SPRT and Local Optimization and not for Fundamental
|
|||
|
matrix, because they internally use random generators.\
|
|||
|
\
|
|||
|
For NAPSAC, Progressive NAPSAC or Graph-Cut methods is required to build
|
|||
|
a neighborhood graph. In framework there are 3 options to do it:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. `NEIGH_FLANN_KNN` – estimate neighborhood graph using OpenCV FLANN
|
|||
|
K nearest-neighbors. The default value for KNN is 7. KNN method may
|
|||
|
work good for sampling but not good for GC-RANSAC.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. `NEIGH_FLANN_RADIUS` – similarly as in previous case finds neighbor
|
|||
|
points which distance is less than 20 pixels.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. `NEIGH_GRID` – for finding points’ neighborhood tiles points in
|
|||
|
cells using hash-table. The method is described in \[2\]. Less
|
|||
|
accurate than `NEIGH_FLANN_RADIUS`, although significantly faster.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Note, `NEIGH_FLANN_RADIUS` and `NEIGH_FLANN_RADIUS` are not able to PnP
|
|||
|
solver, since there are 3D object points.\
|
|||
|
\
|
|||
|
New flags:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. `USAC_DEFAULT` – has standard LO-RANSAC.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. `USAC_PARALLEL` – has LO-RANSAC and RANSACs run in parallel.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. `USAC_ACCURATE` – has GC-RANSAC.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4. `USAC_FAST` – has LO-RANSAC with smaller number iterations in local
|
|||
|
optimization step. Uses RANSAC score to maximize number of inliers
|
|||
|
and terminate earlier.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5. `USAC_PROSAC` – has PROSAC sampling. Note, points must be sorted.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
6. `USAC_FM_8PTS` – has LO-RANSAC. Only valid for Fundamental matrix
|
|||
|
with 8-points solver.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7. `USAC_MAGSAC` – has MAGSAC++.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Every flag uses SPRT verification. And in the end the final
|
|||
|
so-far-the-best model is polished by non minimal estimation of all found
|
|||
|
inliers.\
|
|||
|
\
|
|||
|
A few other important parameters:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. `randomGeneratorState` – since every USAC solver is deterministic in
|
|||
|
OpenCV (i.e., for the same points and parameters returns the
|
|||
|
same result) by providing new state it will output new model.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. `loIterations` – number of iterations for Local Optimization method.
|
|||
|
*The default value is 10*. By increasing `loIterations` the output
|
|||
|
model could be more accurate, however, the computationial time may
|
|||
|
also increase.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. `loSampleSize` – maximum sample number for Local Optimization. *The
|
|||
|
default value is 14*. Note, that by increasing `loSampleSize` the
|
|||
|
accuracy of model can increase as well as the computational time.
|
|||
|
However, it is recommended to keep value less than 100, because
|
|||
|
estimation on low number of points is faster and more robust.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Samples:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
There are three new sample files in opencv/samples directory.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1. `epipolar_lines.cpp` – input arguments of `main` function are two
|
|||
|
pathes to images. Then correspondences are found using
|
|||
|
SIFT detector. Fundamental matrix is found using RANSAC from
|
|||
|
tentaive correspondences and epipolar lines are plot.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2. `essential_mat_reconstr.cpp` – input arguments are path to data file
|
|||
|
containing image names and single intrinsic matrix and directory
|
|||
|
where these images located. Correspondences are found using SIFT.
|
|||
|
The essential matrix is estimated using RANSAC and decomposed to
|
|||
|
rotation and translation. Then by building two relative poses with
|
|||
|
projection matrices image points are triangulated to object points.
|
|||
|
By running RANSAC with 3D plane fitting object points as well as
|
|||
|
correspondences are clustered into planes.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3. `essential_mat_reconstr.py` – the same functionality as in .cpp
|
|||
|
file, however instead of clustering points to plane the 3D map of
|
|||
|
object points is plot.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
References:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
1\. Daniel Barath and Jiří Matas. 2018. Graph-Cut RANSAC. In *Proceedings
|
|||
|
of the iEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition*,
|
|||
|
6733–6741.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
2\. Daniel Barath, Maksym Ivashechkin, and Jiri Matas. 2019. Progressive
|
|||
|
NAPSAC: Sampling from gradually growing neighborhoods. *arXiv preprint
|
|||
|
arXiv:1906.02295*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
3\. Daniel Barath, Jana Noskova, Maksym Ivashechkin, and Jiri Matas.
|
|||
|
2020. MAGSAC++, a fast, reliable and accurate robust estimator. In
|
|||
|
*Proceedings of the iEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern
|
|||
|
recognition (cVPR)*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
4\. O. Chum and J. Matas. 2005. Matching with PROSAC-progressive sample
|
|||
|
consensus. In *Computer vision and pattern recognition*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
5\. O. Chum, J. Matas, and J. Kittler. 2003. Locally optimized RANSAC. In
|
|||
|
*Joint pattern recognition symposium*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
6\. O. Chum, T. Werner, and J. Matas. 2004. Epipolar geometry estimation
|
|||
|
via RANSAC benefits from the oriented epipolar constraint. In
|
|||
|
*International conference on pattern recognition*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
7\. Ondrej Chum, Tomas Werner, and Jiri Matas. 2005. Two-view geometry
|
|||
|
estimation unaffected by a dominant plane. In *2005 iEEE computer
|
|||
|
society conference on computer vision and pattern recognition
|
|||
|
(cVPR’05)*, 772–779.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
8\. M. A. Fischler and R. C. Bolles. 1981. Random sample consensus: A
|
|||
|
paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and
|
|||
|
automated cartography. *Communications of the ACM*.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
9\. Jiri Matas and Ondrej Chum. 2005. Randomized RANSAC with sequential
|
|||
|
probability ratio test. In *Tenth iEEE international conference on
|
|||
|
computer vision (iCCV’05) volume 1*, 1727–1732.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
10\. D. R. Myatt, P. H. S. Torr, S. J. Nasuto, J. M. Bishop, and R.
|
|||
|
Craddock. 2002. NAPSAC: High noise, high dimensional robust estimation.
|
|||
|
In *In bMVC02*, 458–467.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
11\. Henrik Stewénius, Christopher Engels, and David Nistér. 2006. Recent
|
|||
|
developments on direct relative orientation.
|