Monocular Depth Guided Occlusion-Aware Disparity Refinement via Semi-supervised Learning in Laparoscopic Images

Chenghong Zhang; Dongdong He; Wenpeng Gao; Yili Fu; Ziteng Liu

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 21 references

Monocular Depth Guided Occlusion-Aware Disparity Refinement via Semi-supervised Learning in Laparoscopic Images

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Monocular depth, which occlusions cannot touch, can repair disparity errors in stereo laparoscopic images.

desk verdict A plausible refinement plug-in whose central fusion equation appears to invert its own occlusion semantics; the reported gains are tiny and the code is absent. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.08178 v1 pith:4GEUZZWC submitted 2025-05-13 cs.CV

Ziteng Liu , Dongdong He , Chenghong Zhang , Wenpeng Gao , Yili Fu This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CV

keywords disparityestimationrefinementsemi-supervisedlearningocclusionmonoculardepthguidancelaparoscopicimagesopticalflowdifferencelosspositionembedding

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that the hard failure regions of stereo matching in laparoscopic surgery—occlusions and texture-less tissue—can be repaired by borrowing depth from a monocular estimator, because a single camera never suffers the left-right occlusion that breaks stereo correspondence. To make that work, the authors propose DGORNet, a refinement network that predicts an occlusion mask, applies a learned scale-and-shift to the monocular inverse depth, and blends the corrected depth into the coarse disparity exactly where the mask says occlusion occurs. They add a Position Embedding module so the network knows where pixels sit in the image, and a semi-supervised Optical Flow Difference Loss that uses consecutive video frames to constrain disparity without dense labels. On the SCARED benchmark the refined outputs reach the best reported EPE (4.02 px) and RMSE (4.93 mm) on the full-video evaluation set, and the refinement itself costs only about 3.83 seconds per 1000 predictions. If correct, this gives laparoscopic stereo pipelines a small post-processor that can upgrade an existing matcher without retraining it.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the mask-weighted blend of a scale-and-shift corrected monocular inverse depth with the coarse stereo disparity. The Occlusion Mask Prediction Module (OPM) takes the left image, a position map, coarse depth, and coarse disparity, and emits a soft occlusion mask. The Disparity Refinement Module (DRM), a 2D hourglass network, emits scale map $K$ and shift map $B$, so Eq. (1) converts the monocular inverse depth into a refined inverse depth, and Eq. (2) blends it with the coarse disparity according to the mask. The Position Embedding adds sinusoidal and cosine coordinate encodings to the OPM input so that error-prone border and edge regions are localized. The Optical Flow Difference Loss uses the x-component difference between left and right optical flow fields across consecutive frames, with the y-component difference as an adaptive confidence weight, to constrain the refined disparity on unlabeled frames.

What would settle it

A reader could settle the claim by evaluating DGORNet on a laparoscopic sequence with dense ground truth and computing EPE separately inside and outside occlusion masks: if the depth-guided refinement does not reduce EPE inside occlusion masks compared with the coarse disparity, the central premise is not carrying the gain. A stricter test is to corrupt the monocular depth with a known non-affine bias—such as a depth-dependent drift—and observe whether the final EPE degrades, since Eq. (1) can absorb only scale and shift errors.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

DGORNet's central claim is that monocular depth is an occlusion-free signal that can fix the disparity map exactly where stereo matching fails. The network takes a coarse disparity from an existing stereo matcher, a coarse inverse depth from a monocular depth predictor, the left image, and a position embedding; it then predicts a soft occlusion mask $M$, and maps the inverse depth to a refined inverse depth $\hat{D}_{inv} = K D_{inv} + B$ via learned scale and shift maps. The final disparity is $\hat{S} = M S + (1-M) \hat{D}_{inv}$, so the mask decides where to trust the original stereo result and where to trust the depth-guided correction. On SCARED, the authors report that this beats both the base stereo predictors and four state-of-the-art methods on EPE and RMSE, with the best numbers 4.02 px and 4.93 mm on the full-video evaluation set. The slightly higher Bad3 on that set is attributed by the authors to outliers introduced by the monocular depth predictor, a limitation they state directly.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the off-the-shelf monocular depth estimator remains accurate in laparoscopic scenes after a learned scale-and-shift correction; if its depth is systematically wrong on tissue texture, specular reflections, or instruments, the refinement blends that error into the final disparity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Existing stereo matchers for laparoscopic images can be upgraded by appending DGORNet as a small post-processor, without retraining the base matcher.
Semi-supervised training with video frames can reduce the need for dense disparity labels, since unlabeled frames are regularized by optical-flow temporal consistency.
Depth-guided refinement should be most beneficial exactly at occluded object boundaries, tool edges, and image borders, where stereo matching errors concentrate.
The refinement overhead is small relative to the base matcher's runtime, so the accuracy gain can be obtained under latency constraints by choosing the smaller base predictor.
If the depth signal really is occlusion-free, the same refinement idea could be transferred to other stereo settings where occlusion is the dominant error source.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Extension: the paper's explanation predicts that the EPE gain should concentrate inside occlusion masks; measuring EPE separately inside and outside predicted occlusion regions on a different laparoscopic dataset would test whether depth guidance, not some other component, is carrying the improvement.
Extension: because Eq. (1) only corrects for scale and shift, a monocular depth estimator with a non-affine systematic bias—for example one that misreads specular highlights or surgical instruments—would inject structured errors that the learned correction cannot absorb.
A testable consequence the authors leave implicit: replacing the left-right-consistency-derived occlusion masks with ground-truth occlusion masks during training should strengthen the mask branch and therefore the final disparity, since the current supervision inherits the limitations of LRC checks.
The runtime numbers suggest a practical deployment path: the small prototype runs in about 40 seconds per 1000 predictions and is described as suitable for latency-sensitive settings, so the refinement is plausible as a real-time intraoperative component.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a reasonable plug-in idea for refining stereo laparoscopic disparity with monocular depth, but the paper as written has a load-bearing internal contradiction. Equation (2) blends coarse disparity S and refined inverse depth D_inv_hat with the occlusion mask M, where M→1 means occluded. That gives occluded pixels the coarse S and occlusion-free pixels the depth-refined value. This is the opposite of the advertised mechanism from the abstract, which says depth 'unaffected by occlusion' refines occluded regions. Unless the implementation silently flips the mask convention, the network cannot be learning what the paper claims. No code is released, so the reader can't tell which variant produced Table 1.

What is genuinely useful: the overall setup—depth predictor plus disparity predictor plus refinement with position embeddings and a semi-supervised optical-flow difference loss—is a sensible combination for label-scarce surgical video. The base-predictor comparison (MSDESIS, GMStereo, HSM, DeepPruner) is the right experimental design, and the ablation on SEK isolates the PE and OFDLoss contributions. The computational overhead of the refinement is small (3.83 s/1000 predictions), which is a practical point.

Where it gets soft: the effect sizes are tiny—EPE on SEF goes from 4.04 to 4.02 for GMStereo, and Bad3 actually gets slightly worse. There are no error bars or repeated runs, so we can't tell if the gains are real. The LeReS depth pretrained on natural images may not transfer well to laparoscopy; the paper concedes this can raise Bad3. And the Eq. (2) issue isn't minor rhetoric—it's the center of the method.

Who would get value from this: people working on stereoscopic depth refinement for endoscopy, and anyone testing 'depth helps disparity in occlusion' hypotheses. But the numbers should not be taken at face value until the equation is fixed or clarified.

Recommendation: send it to peer review, but only with a firm instruction that the authors correct or explain Eq. (2), release code, and ideally report variance over multiple training runs. The idea is worth a referee's time; the current write-up is not yet an accurate report of its own method.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes DGORNet, a post-processing module that refines coarse disparity maps from an existing stereo matcher by combining them with monocular inverse-depth estimates from LeReS. It introduces an occlusion-mask prediction module trained with left-right-consistency-derived masks, a position embedding to provide spatial context, and an optical flow difference loss for semi-supervised temporal regularization on unlabeled frames. Experiments on the SCARED dataset (SEF and SEK) compare DGORNet attached to MSDESIS and GMStereo against four baselines, reporting best EPE 4.02 px and RMSE 4.93 mm, with an ablation study for the position embedding and OFDLoss components.

Significance. The paper addresses a relevant problem in laparoscopic disparity estimation, and the experimental design of attaching the same refinement module to two different base predictors is a clean way to measure transferability. The reported low overhead of the refinement module (3.83 s per 1000 predictions) is also a useful engineering property. If the claimed results are reproducible, DGORNet would be a sensible low-cost component for stereo laparoscopic disparity estimation. However, the advertised mechanism is currently undermined by the sign convention in Eq. (2), and the quantitative support is weakened by small, mixed margins and the absence of variance estimates.

major comments (4)

[Section 2.1, Eq. (2)] The mask convention contradicts the central mechanism. The text states M in [0,1], with M→1 indicating occlusion and M→0 occlusion-free, but Eq. (2) computes S_hat = M*S + (1-M)*D_inv_hat. Under the stated semantics, occluded pixels keep the coarse disparity S, and only occlusion-free pixels receive the depth-refined inverse depth. Since Eq. (6) supervises M with the LRC-derived mask M_LRC, the learned mask will be near 1 exactly where the paper claims depth guidance should act, so the final prediction excludes D_inv_hat from occluded regions. If the intended formula is S_hat = (1-M)*S + M*D_inv_hat, or if the mask convention is reversed, this must be corrected and verified in the implementation; without released code, Table 1 cannot be attributed to the described depth-guided occlusion refinement.
[Section 4.1, Table 1] The reported advantage over the base predictors is small and inconsistent. On SEF, DGOR-LG changes EPE from 4.04 to 4.02 pixels but increases Bad3 from 43.95% to 45.37%, and DGOR-LM increases Bad3 from 46.04% to 47.04% while improving EPE by 0.34 pixels. The RMSE gains are 0.05–0.10 mm. No error bars, repeated-seed results, or statistical tests are reported for any table, and the ablation in Table 2 shows differences as small as 0.003 pixels EPE (2.207 vs 2.204) and a Bad3 change in the wrong direction for OFDLoss (13.29 vs 13.30). These margins are within typical run-to-run variation, so the claim that DGORNet outperforms state-of-the-art methods is not yet established.
[Section 3.2 and Section 4.1] The assumption that LeReS provides depth unaffected by occlusion is not validated for laparoscopic scenes. LeReS is pretrained on natural images, and the paper itself attributes the Bad3 increase to potential outliers introduced by the depth predictor LeReS. Because Eq. (1) applies only a learned per-pixel affine correction to the inverse depth, it is unlikely to remove spatially varying bias caused by tissue texture, specular highlights, or instruments. A quantitative evaluation of LeReS (e.g., error maps against SCARED ground truth, stratified by occlusion status) or an ablation with a domain-adapted depth predictor is needed before the central claim can be accepted.
[Section 2.3, Eq. (4)] The OFDLoss as written is not a valid non-negative loss: L_flow = w_flow · (Δ_x F^k - Δ^k_x P) with positive weights w_flow can be negative, and minimizing it may encourage the signed difference to become more negative rather than closer to zero. If the intended quantity is an L1 or squared error, an absolute value or square must appear in Eq. (4). This matters because OFDLoss is one of the two claimed contributions and is used directly in Eq. (6).

minor comments (4)

[Table 1] The columns for Params and Runtime are not aligned; entries such as '0.33 (55.49)' and '3.83 (40.42)' need explicit labels (e.g., refinement-only versus total runtime) so the reader can interpret the reported numbers.
[Fig. 2 caption] The caption states 'five state-of-the-art methods' while the figure shows four panels (DeepPruner, HSM, GMStereo, MSDESIS); the caption and the text should be reconciled.
[Section 2.3] The notation for frame indices is inconsistent: the text refers to P^{t-1}_R while Eq. (3) and the surrounding discussion use P^{k-1}; please use a single consistent index.
[Eq. (5)] The notation 'clamp0,1' is undefined; write clamp(x, 0, 1) or min(1, max(0, x)) to specify the clipping operation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central refinement claim is an empirical comparison on held-out SCARED data, and the depth backbone, stereo baselines, and optical-flow estimator are all external.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that DGORNet refines coarse disparity maps and outperforms prior methods on SCARED SEF/SEK. This claim is supported by Table 1, which reports EPE, Bad3, and RMSE on held-out datasets 8 and 9, with the depth predictor LeReS, the disparity predictors MSDESIS/GMStereo, and the optical-flow estimator GMFlow all being external pretrained components. The refinement parameters K and B are learned and evaluated out-of-sample, so there is no fitted input being renamed as a prediction. The occlusion-mask supervision MLRC is derived from the LRC check, but it is used as training supervision for the mask branch rather than as a claimed independent source of the final disparity result; reusing a known heuristic for supervision is not a circular derivation. No load-bearing step reduces by definition to its own input, and no uniqueness theorem or self-citation chain is invoked to force the architecture. The skepticism about Eq. (2) is a legitimate correctness concern about mask semantics, not a circularity: even if the mask convention in Eq. (2) is inconsistent with the text, the reported numbers remain an empirical benchmark comparison rather than a tautology. The honest non-circularity finding is therefore score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The network's own parameters are learned from data and are not listed as free parameters. The hand-set loss weights and the reliability-weight clamp are the main numbers chosen without derivation. The method assumes that pretrained monocular depth transfers to laparoscopic scenes and that LRC provides trustworthy mask supervision.

free parameters (4)

OFDLoss weight in semi-supervised loss = 0.5
Eq. 6; chosen by hand without sensitivity analysis.
Dice loss weight = 0.25
Eq. 6; chosen by hand without sensitivity analysis.
Weighted BCE loss weight = 0.25
Eq. 6; chosen by hand without sensitivity analysis.
Clamp upper bound for optical-flow weight = 1
Eq. 5; chosen ad hoc as the scale for the squared y-component difference.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Monocular depth from LeReS is accurate enough on laparoscopic scenes to guide refinement.
Sections 1 and 2.1 rely on this premise, but no validation on surgical data is provided before use.
domain assumption LRC-derived masks are valid occlusion ground truth.
Section 3.3 uses Left-Right Consistency to create mask supervision, without manual verification.
domain assumption Optical-flow y-component deviations are a valid reliability weight.
Eq. 5 assumes that y-deviation of optical flow is a good inverse-confidence measure for the flow loss.
domain assumption SCARED stereo pairs are rectified so y-disparity should be zero.
Section 2.3 states the y-components should consistently be zero, which requires rectified geometry.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Monocular Depth Guided Occlusion-Aware Disparity Refinement via Semi-supervised Learning in Laparoscopic Images." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4GEUZZWC

@misc{pith2026250508178,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Monocular Depth Guided Occlusion-Aware Disparity Refinement via Semi-supervised Learning in Laparoscopic Images},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4GEUZZWC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.08178}
}

read the original abstract

Occlusion and the scarcity of labeled surgical data are significant challenges in disparity estimation for stereo laparoscopic images. To address these issues, this study proposes a Depth Guided Occlusion-Aware Disparity Refinement Network (DGORNet), which refines disparity maps by leveraging monocular depth information unaffected by occlusion. A Position Embedding (PE) module is introduced to provide explicit spatial context, enhancing the network's ability to localize and refine features. Furthermore, we introduce an Optical Flow Difference Loss (OFDLoss) for unlabeled data, leveraging temporal continuity across video frames to improve robustness in dynamic surgical scenes. Experiments on the SCARED dataset demonstrate that DGORNet outperforms state-of-the-art methods in terms of End-Point Error (EPE) and Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), particularly in occlusion and texture-less regions. Ablation studies confirm the contributions of the Position Embedding and Optical Flow Difference Loss, highlighting their roles in improving spatial and temporal consistency. These results underscore DGORNet's effectiveness in enhancing disparity estimation for laparoscopic surgery, offering a practical solution to challenges in disparity estimation and data limitations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.08178 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Error distribution map of disparity prediction result of five state-of-the-art [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** An example of the relationship between a point’s movement and disparity. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Prediction result on the SEK. The refinement modules incur minimal computational overhead (3.83 seconds/1000 predictions), though total runtime depends on base disparity predictors (40.42s for DGOR-LM vs. 207.06s for DGOR-LG). DGOR-LM achieves real-time capability (40…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages

[1]

CoRRabs/2101.01133(2021), https://arxiv.org/abs/2101

Allan, M., McLeod, A.J., Wang, C., Rosenthal, J., Hu, Z., Gard, N., Eisert, P., Fu, K.X., Zeffiro, T., Xia, W., Zhu, Z., Luo, H., Jia, F., Zhang, X., Li, X., Sharan, L., Kurmann, T., Schmid, S., Sznitman, R., Psychogyios, D., Azizian, M., Stoyanov, D., Maier-Hein, L., Speidel, S.: Stereo correspondence and reconstruction of endoscopic data challenge. CoRR...

arXiv 2021
[2]

In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Chang, J.R., Chen, Y.S.: Pyramid stereo matching network. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 5410–5418 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2018.00567

arXiv 2018
[3]

In: Wang, L., Dou, Q., Fletcher, P.T., Speidel, S., Li, S

Cheng, X., Zhong, Y., Harandi, M., Drummond, T., Wang, Z., Ge, Z.: Deep laparoscopic stereo matching with transformers. In: Wang, L., Dou, Q., Fletcher, P.T., Speidel, S., Li, S. (eds.) Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2022. pp. 464–474. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham (2022)

work page 2022
[4]

Displays80, 102573 (2023)

Dong, L., Han, Y., Hu, M., Luo, H., Wang, Y.: Stereo matching method based on high-precision occlusion-recovering and discontinuity-preserving. Displays80, 102573 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j. displa.2023.102573, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S014193822300207X

arXiv 2023
[5]

In: International Conference on Learning Representations 2021 (2021), https: //openreview.net/forum?id=YicbFdNTTy

Dosovitskiy, A., Beyer, L., Kolesnikov, A., Weissenborn, D., Zhai, X., Unterthiner, T., Dehghani, M., Minderer, M., Heigold, G., Gelly, S., Uszkoreit, J., Houlsby, N.: An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. In: International Conference on Learning Representations 2021 (2021), https: //openreview.net/forum?id=YicbFdNTTy

work page 2021
[6]

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence46(2), 681–694 (2024).https://doi

Li, P., Zhao, J., Wu, J., Deng, C., Han, Y., Wang, H., Yu, T.: Opal: Occlusion pattern aware loss for unsupervised light field disparity estimation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence46(2), 681–694 (2024).https://doi. org/10.1109/TPAMI.2023.3296600

arXiv 2024
[7]

Computers in Biology and Medicine140, 105109 (2022)

Luo, H., Wang, C., Duan, X., Liu, H., Wang, P., Hu, Q., Jia, F.: Unsuper- vised learning of depth estimation from imperfect rectified stereo laparoscopic images. Computers in Biology and Medicine140, 105109 (2022). https:// doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.105109, https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010482521009033

work page arXiv 2022
[8]

IEEE transactions on medical imaging41(11), 3218–3230 (2022)

Psychogyios, D., Mazomenos, E., Vasconcelos, F., Stoyanov, D.: Msdesis: Multitask stereo disparity estimation and surgical instrument segmentation. IEEE transactions on medical imaging41(11), 3218–3230 (2022)

work page 2022

Show all 21 references

[9]

In: Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence

Ren, Z., Yan, J., Ni, B., Liu, B., Yang, X., Zha, H.: Unsupervised deep learning for optical flow estimation. In: Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence. vol. 31 (2017).https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v31i1.10723

2017 doi
[10]

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence46(1), 497–508 (2024).https://doi

Sun, L., Bian, J.W., Zhan, H., Yin, W., Reid, I., Shen, C.: Sc-depthv3: Robust self-supervised monocular depth estimation for dynamic scenes. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence46(1), 497–508 (2024).https://doi. org/10.1109/TPAMI.2023.3322549

2024
[11]

In: Wang, L., Dou, Q., Fletcher, P.T., Speidel, S., Li, S

Tukra, S., Giannarou, S.: Stereo depth estimation via self-supervised contrastive representation learning. In: Wang, L., Dou, Q., Fletcher, P.T., Speidel, S., Li, S. (eds.) Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI
[12]

In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP)

Wang, W., Ye, S., Wang, X., Zhao, Y.: Omnet: Real-time stereo matching with unsupervised occlusion mask. In: 2022 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP). pp. 1241–1245 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP46576. 2022.9897748

2022
[13]

IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering70(2), 488–500 (2023)

Wei, R., Li, B., Mo, H., Lu, B., Long, Y., Yang, B., Dou, Q., Liu, Y., Sun, D.: Stereo dense scene reconstruction and accurate localization for learning-based navigation of laparoscope in minimally invasive surgery. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering70(2), 488–500 (20...

2023
[14]

IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 41(7), 1651–1664 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2022.3147414

Xia, W., Chen, E.C.S., Pautler, S., Peters, T.M.: A robust edge-preserving stereo matching method for laparoscopic images. IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 41(7), 1651–1664 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2022.3147414

2022
[15]

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence45(11), 13941–13958 (2023)

Xu, H., Zhang, J., Cai, J., Rezatofighi, H., Yu, F., Tao, D., Geiger, A.: Unifying flow, stereo and depth estimation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence45(11), 13941–13958 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2023. 3298645

2023 doi
[16]

IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 28(8), 3885–3897 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2019.2903318

Yan, T., Gan, Y., Xia, Z., Zhao, Q.: Segment-based disparity refinement with occlusion handling for stereo matching. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 28(8), 3885–3897 (2019).https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2019.2903318

2019
[17]

IEEE Transactions on Image Processing31, 5828–5840 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2022.3202367

Yang, B., Xu, S., Chen, H., Zheng, W., Liu, C.: Reconstruct dynamic soft-tissue with stereo endoscope based on a single-layer network. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing31, 5828–5840 (2022).https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2022.3202367

2022
[18]

In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Yang, G., Manela, J., Happold, M., Ramanan, D.: Hierarchical deep stereo match- ing on high-resolution images. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 5515–5524 (2019)

2019
[19]

In: 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)

Yuan, S., Luo, L., Hui, Z., Pu, C., Xiang, X., Ranjan, R., Demandolx, D.: Unsamflow: Unsupervised optical flow guided by segment anything model. In: 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). pp. 19027–19037 (2024).https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR5...

2024
[20]

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence22(7), 675–684 (2000).https://doi.org/10.1109/34.865184

Zitnick, C., Kanade, T.: A cooperative algorithm for stereo matching and occlusion detection. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence22(7), 675–684 (2000).https://doi.org/10.1109/34.865184

2000 doi
[2022]

pp. 604–614. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham (2022) 10 Liu. et al

2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

CoRRabs/2101.01133(2021), https://arxiv.org/abs/2101

Allan, M., McLeod, A.J., Wang, C., Rosenthal, J., Hu, Z., Gard, N., Eisert, P., Fu, K.X., Zeffiro, T., Xia, W., Zhu, Z., Luo, H., Jia, F., Zhang, X., Li, X., Sharan, L., Kurmann, T., Schmid, S., Sznitman, R., Psychogyios, D., Azizian, M., Stoyanov, D., Maier-Hein, L., Speidel, S.: Stereo correspondence and reconstruction of endoscopic data challenge. CoRR...

arXiv 2021

[2] [2]

In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Chang, J.R., Chen, Y.S.: Pyramid stereo matching network. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. pp. 5410–5418 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1109/CVPR.2018.00567

arXiv 2018

[3] [3]

In: Wang, L., Dou, Q., Fletcher, P.T., Speidel, S., Li, S

Cheng, X., Zhong, Y., Harandi, M., Drummond, T., Wang, Z., Ge, Z.: Deep laparoscopic stereo matching with transformers. In: Wang, L., Dou, Q., Fletcher, P.T., Speidel, S., Li, S. (eds.) Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2022. pp. 464–474. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham (2022)

work page 2022

[4] [4]

Displays80, 102573 (2023)

Dong, L., Han, Y., Hu, M., Luo, H., Wang, Y.: Stereo matching method based on high-precision occlusion-recovering and discontinuity-preserving. Displays80, 102573 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j. displa.2023.102573, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S014193822300207X

arXiv 2023

[5] [5]

In: International Conference on Learning Representations 2021 (2021), https: //openreview.net/forum?id=YicbFdNTTy

Dosovitskiy, A., Beyer, L., Kolesnikov, A., Weissenborn, D., Zhai, X., Unterthiner, T., Dehghani, M., Minderer, M., Heigold, G., Gelly, S., Uszkoreit, J., Houlsby, N.: An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. In: International Conference on Learning Representations 2021 (2021), https: //openreview.net/forum?id=YicbFdNTTy

work page 2021

[6] [6]

IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence46(2), 681–694 (2024).https://doi

Li, P., Zhao, J., Wu, J., Deng, C., Han, Y., Wang, H., Yu, T.: Opal: Occlusion pattern aware loss for unsupervised light field disparity estimation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence46(2), 681–694 (2024).https://doi. org/10.1109/TPAMI.2023.3296600

arXiv 2024

[7] [7]

Computers in Biology and Medicine140, 105109 (2022)

Luo, H., Wang, C., Duan, X., Liu, H., Wang, P., Hu, Q., Jia, F.: Unsuper- vised learning of depth estimation from imperfect rectified stereo laparoscopic images. Computers in Biology and Medicine140, 105109 (2022). https:// doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.105109, https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010482521009033

work page arXiv 2022

[8] [8]

IEEE transactions on medical imaging41(11), 3218–3230 (2022)

Psychogyios, D., Mazomenos, E., Vasconcelos, F., Stoyanov, D.: Msdesis: Multitask stereo disparity estimation and surgical instrument segmentation. IEEE transactions on medical imaging41(11), 3218–3230 (2022)

work page 2022