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

+1163新增论文
+868其中 AI 相关
+88已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-06 05:59 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 12:13各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-05 07:00 — 2026-11-06 07:00(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:2026-11-06 05:59最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 12:13库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 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。

15,949 已收录论文13,765 AI 相关3,571 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 2026-11-06 05:57(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.05361

面向植被丰富环境视觉三维重建基准的可见性感知参考生成

Visibility-Aware Reference Generation for Benchmarking Visual 3D Reconstruction in Vegetation-Rich Environments

Zhipeng Zhong, Matthew Coombes, Cunjia Liu

AI 速览:提出基于LiDAR的参考生成流程,用LDGVS可见性评分改进HPR滤波,为植被户外场景的视觉深度估计与三维重建提供评测基准。

Reliable evaluation of visual 3D reconstruction and depth estimation in vegetation-rich outdoor environments is limited by the scarcity of geometric ground-truth data and the cost of complete scanner surveys. We present a LiDARbased reference-generation pipeline for evaluating the zero-shot performance of feed-forward visual-geometry models alongside conventional structure-from-motion (SfM) methods. The pipeline reuses camera images, LiDAR scans, and reference poses from existing multi-sensor localization datasets to generate per-view depth maps and visible reference point clouds. To address visibility errors in accumulated LiDAR scans, we introduce the LargeDepth-Gap Visibility Score (LDGVS) for point-wise visibility filtering and automatic scale selection in Hidden Point Removal(HPR). Experiments on TartanAirV2 and TartanGround show that, compared with Poisson surface reconstruction, which is an approach suited to completed scan surveys, the combined HPR and LDGVS filtering retains approximately three times the point density at comparable absolute relative error. We also apply the pipeline to the BotanicGarden dataset to systematically compare depth estimation and 3D reconstruction methods. Feedforward methods produce dense depth predictions efficiently, but their 3D reconstructions can contain duplicated structures. Conventional SfM generally produces more coherent geometry, but its reconstructions remain sparse and more prone to failure in challenging vegetated scenes. The benchmark toolkit and datasets will be released.

cs.CV · cs.RO
arXiv ↗PDF ↗