跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+1072新增论文
+845其中 AI 相关
+94已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-09 18:35 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-09 13:22各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-08 19:04 — 2026-11-09 19:04(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-09 18:35最近发现新增版本:2026-11-09 13:22库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-07 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

18,172 已收录论文15,506 AI 相关4,527 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-09 18:33(北京时间)
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2610.35554

Metric Scale for Insta360 Structure-from-Motion from the Camera's Embedded IMU

Davide Cuttini, Diego Di Tommaso, Alessio Antoniacomi, Luca Simonetti

原文摘要

Structure-from-motion (SfM) from the dual-fisheye video of a consumer 360-degree camera recovers geometry only up to a similarity transform; in the pipeline considered here, metric scale is obtained from smartphone ARKit or ARCore poses captured alongside the camera. This paper evaluates a self-contained alternative: the IMU embedded in the Insta360 X5 and X6, recorded at 1 kHz. The sensor is characterised (noise density, camera-IMU synchronisation, accelerometer scale factor, bias stability), the camera-IMU rotation and frame timing are estimated from the data, and the scale is recovered by a linear visual-inertial alignment over the SfM poses of a whole survey. The standard formulation, with gravity and accelerometer bias shared across the survey, overestimates the scale by 3.4% on average; estimating each contiguous segment independently and averaging removes the bias. On nine surveys with a co-mounted LiDAR scanner the inertial scale deviates from the LiDAR by 0.81% in mean absolute error, against 1.94% for the smartphone scale; on printed fiducial markers both agree within the 1% uncertainty of the target. On the reference trajectories of thirty sequences of a public benchmark, brought to scales of 1/40, 1 and 40, the estimator recovers the metric scale with a mean error of -0.07% and a standard deviation of 1.28%. On fifty production surveys where the smartphone is the only reference, the two scales agree to a standard deviation of 2.3%, the inertial scale being 0.3% lower on average; the difference is uncorrelated with run length, grows with the extent of the smartphone anchor, and cannot be attributed to either reference. An ablation over window construction and a comparison with monocular metric-depth networks complete the study.

cs.CV