Multiple View Geometry

1. Multiple View Geometry Marc Pollefeys University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Modified by Philippos Mordohai

2. Outline • Parameter estimation • Robust estimation (RANSAC) • Chapter 3 of “Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision” by Hartley and Zisserman

3. Parameter estimation • 2D homography Given a set of (xi,xi’), compute H (xi’=Hxi) • 3D to 2D camera projection Given a set of (Xi,xi), compute P (xi=PXi) • Fundamental matrix Given a set of (xi,xi’), compute F (xi’TFxi=0) • Trifocal tensor Given a set of (xi,xi’,xi”), compute T

4. Number of measurements required • At least as many independent equations as degrees of freedom required • Example: 2 independent equations / point 8 degrees of freedom 4x2≥8

5. Approximate solutions • Minimal solution 4 points yield an exact solution for H • More points • No exact solution, because measurements are inexact (“noise”) • Search for “best” according to some cost function • Algebraic or geometric/statistical cost

6. Gold Standard algorithm • Cost function that is optimal for some assumptions • Computational algorithm that minimizes it is called “Gold Standard” algorithm • Other algorithms can then be compared to it

7. Direct Linear Transformation(DLT)

8. Direct Linear Transformation(DLT) • Equations are linear in h • Only 2 out of 3 are linearly independent (indeed, 2 eq/pt) (only drop third row if wi’≠0) • Holds for any homogeneous representation, e.g. (xi’,yi’,1)

9. Direct Linear Transformation(DLT) • Solving for H size A is 8x9 or 12x9, but rank 8 Trivial solution is h=09T is not interesting 1-D null-space yields solution of interest pick for example the one with

10. Direct Linear Transformation(DLT) • Over-determined solution No exact solution because of inexact measurement i.e. “noise” • Find approximate solution • Additional constraint needed to avoid 0, e.g. • not possible, so minimize

11. Singular Value Decomposition Homogeneous least-squares

12. DLT algorithm • Objective • Given n≥4 2D to 2D point correspondences {xi↔xi’}, determine the 2D homography matrix H such that xi’=Hxi • Algorithm • For each correspondence xi ↔xi’ compute Ai. Usually only two first rows needed. • Assemble n 2x9 matrices Ai into a single 2nx9 matrix A • Obtain SVD of A. Solution for h is last column of V • Determine H from h

13. Inhomogeneous solution Since h can only be computed up to scale, pick hj=1, e.g. h9=1, and solve for 8-vector Solve using Gaussian elimination (4 points) or using linear least-squares (more than 4 points) However, if h9=0 this approach fails also poor results if h9 close to zero Therefore, not recommended Note h9=H33=0 if origin is mapped to infinity

14. Define: Then, Degenerate configurations x1 x1 x1 x4 x4 x4 x2 H? H’? x2 x2 x3 x3 x3 (case B) (case A) i=1,2,3,4 Constraints: H* is rank-1 matrix and thus not a homography If H* is unique solution, then no homography mapping xi→xi’(case B) If further solution H exist, then also αH*+βH (case A) (2-D null-space in stead of 1-D null-space)

15. 3D Homographies (15 dof) Minimum of 5 points or 5 planes 2D affinities (6 dof) Minimum of 3 points or lines Solutions from lines, etc. 2D homographies from 2D lines Minimum of 4 lines Conic provides 5 constraints Mixed configurations?

16. Cost functions • Algebraic distance • Geometric distance • Reprojection error • Comparison • Geometric interpretation • Sampson error

17. algebraic distance where Algebraic distance DLT minimizes residual vector partial vector for each (xi↔xi’) algebraic error vector Not geometrically/statistically meaningfull, but given good normalization it works fine and is very fast (use for initialization)

18. measured coordinates estimated coordinates true coordinates Error in one image Symmetric transfer error Reprojection error Geometric distance d(.,.) Euclidean distance (in image) e.g. calibration pattern

19. Reprojection error

20. typical, but not , except for affinities Comparison of geometric and algebraic distances Error in one image For affinities DLT can minimize geometric distance Possibility for iterative algorithm

21. Analog to conic fitting Geometric interpretation of reprojection error

22. Sampson error: 1st order approximation of Vector that minimizes the geometric error is the closest point on the variety to the measurement Find the vector that minimizes subject to Sampson error between algebraic and geometric error

23. Use Lagrange multipliers: minimize derivatives Find the vector that minimizes subject to

24. Sampson error: 1st order approximation of Vector that minimizes the geometric error is the closest point on the variety to the measurement Find the vector that minimizes subject to Sampson error between algebraic and geometric error (Sampson error)

25. Sampson approximation A few points: • For a 2D homography X=(x,y,x’,y’) • is the algebraic error vector • is a 2x4 matrix, e.g. • Similar to algebraic error in fact, same as Mahalanobis distance • Sampson error independent of linear reparametrization (cancels out in between e and J) • Must be summed for all points • Close to geometric error, but much fewer unknowns

26. Maximum Likelihood Estimate: minimize Statistical cost function and Maximum Likelihood Estimation • Optimal cost function related to noise model • Assume zero-mean isotropic Gaussian noise (assume outliers removed) Error in one image

27. Maximum Likelihood Estimate: minimize Statistical cost function and Maximum Likelihood Estimation • Optimal cost function related to noise model • Assume zero-mean isotropic Gaussian noise (assume outliers removed) Error in both images

28. Error in two images (independent) Varying covariances Mahalanobis distance • General Gaussian case Measurement X with covariance matrix Σ

29. Outline • Parameter estimation • Robust estimation (RANSAC) • Chapter 3 of “Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision” by Hartley and Zisserman

30. Robust estimation • What if set of matches contains gross outliers?

31. RANSAC • Objective • Robust fit of model to data set S which contains outliers • Algorithm • Randomly select a sample of s data points from S and instantiate the model from this subset. • Determine the set of data points Si which are within a distance threshold t of the model. The set Si is the consensus set of samples and defines the inliers of S. • If the subset of Si is greater than some threshold T, re-estimate the model using all the points in Si and terminate • If the size of Si is less than T, select a new subset and repeat the above. • After N trials the largest consensus set Si is selected, and the model is re-estimated using all the points in the subset Si

32. How many samples? • Choose t so probability for inlier is α (e.g. 0.95) • Or empirically • Choose N so that, with probability p, at least one random sample is free from outliers. e.g. p =0.99

33. Acceptable consensus set? • Typically, terminate when inlier ratio reaches expected ratio of inliers

34. Adaptively determining the number of samples e is often unknown a priori, so pick worst case, e.g. 50%, and adapt if more inliers are found, e.g. 80% would yield e=0.2 • N=∞, sample_count =0 • While N >sample_count repeat • Choose a sample and count the number of inliers • Set e=1-(number of inliers)/(total number of points) • Recompute N from e • Increment the sample_count by 1 • Terminate

35. Robust Maximum Likelihood Estimation Previous MLE algorithm considers fixed set of inliers Better, robust cost function (reclassifies)

36. Other robust algorithms • RANSAC maximizes number of inliers • LMedS minimizes median error • No threshold • Needs estimate of percentage of outliers • Not recommended: case deletion, iterative least-squares, etc.

37. Automatic computation of H • Objective • Compute homography between two images • Algorithm • Interest points: Compute interest points in each image • Putative correspondences: Compute a set of interest point matches based on some similarity measure • RANSAC robust estimation: Repeat for N samples • (a) Select 4 correspondences and compute H • (b) Calculate the distance d for each putative match • (c) Compute the number of inliers consistent with H (d<t) • Choose H with most inliers • Optimal estimation: re-estimate H from all inliers by minimizing ML cost function with Levenberg-Marquardt • Guided matching: Determine more matches using prediction by computed H • Optionally iterate last two steps until convergence

38. Determine putative correspondences • Compare interest points Similarity measure: • SAD, SSD, ZNCC on small neighborhood • If motion is limited, only consider interest points with similar coordinates • More advanced approaches exist, based on invariance…

39. Example: robust computation Interest points (500/image) (640x480) Putative correspondences (268) (Best match,SSD<20,±320) Outliers (117) (t=1.25 pixel; 43 iterations) Inliers (151) Final inliers (262) (2 MLE-inlier cycles; d=0.23→d=0.19; IterLev-Mar=10)