Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 55 references

Mapping Pamir: Multi-Session Visual-Inertial SLAM and 3D Reconstruction of an Underwater Shipwreck

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-07-14 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read An affordable action-camera pipeline maps both the exterior and interior of a shipwreck at true water depth across multiple dives.

desk verdict Solid field systems paper: consumer-gear multi-session wreck map with released data, but “correctly scaled” is asserted more than measured. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.10925 v1 pith:TQ5G3PTU submitted 2026-07-12 cs.RO

Michalis Chatzispyrou , Luke Horgan , Hyunkil Hwang , Harish Sathishchandra , Chinmay Burgul , Monika Roznere , Alberto Quattrini Li , Philippos Mordohai
show 1 more author
Ioannis Rekleitis
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.RO
keywords underwaterSLAMvisual-inertialodometrymulti-sessionmappingstructure-from-motionshipwreckreconstructionactioncameradivecomputerdense3D
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

The paper shows that ordinary scuba gear—an action camera that already records inertial data plus a dive computer that logs water depth—can produce a correctly scaled 3-D model of a large underwater structure even when the data must be collected over several short dives. Visual-inertial SLAM first extracts a sparse set of keyframes and a metrically scaled trajectory; the dive-computer depths then lock the absolute vertical coordinate; fixed calibration targets (when present) align separate sessions into one coordinate frame; and a global structure-from-motion package finally densifies the reconstruction. Applied to the Pamir wreck off Barbados, the method fused more than 300 000 frames from three dives into a single model that for the first time includes both the exterior hull and accessible interior spaces such as the engine room. The practical consequence is that divers and scientists can map sites of archaeological or environmental interest without specialized underwater vehicles or synchronized stereo rigs.

What carries the argument

SVIn2 keyframe selection plus dive-computer absolute-depth correction, used as pose priors for COLMAP: the keyframes guarantee sufficient baseline and overlap while the depth correction supplies the unobservable absolute scale and z-axis that monocular visual-inertial odometry alone cannot observe.

What would settle it

Place a known-length object or survey tape at several fixed locations on the wreck, reconstruct them with the full pipeline, and check whether the recovered lengths and absolute water depths match the ground-truth measurements within a few percent.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

A pipeline that feeds keyframes and poses from visual-inertial SLAM, corrected by dive-computer depth, into global bundle adjustment yields a metrically accurate multi-session dense reconstruction of both the exterior and accessible interior of a shipwreck from monocular action-camera video.

Load-bearing premise

That the simple pinhole-plus-distortion camera model calibrated underwater and the linear fit of sparse dive-computer readings to the visual-inertial trajectory are accurate enough to give the final reconstruction true metric scale and absolute depth.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Scientists carrying only consumer action cameras and dive computers can produce correctly scaled 3-D models of shipwrecks, reefs or infrastructure without AUVs or stereo rigs.
  • Multi-dive campaigns become feasible: short nitrogen-limited sessions can be fused into one consistent map by re-using fixed targets or natural features.
  • Both exterior surfaces and confined interior spaces can be reconstructed from the same monocular stream once absolute depth is recovered.
  • The released multi-session shipwreck datasets provide a public benchmark for future underwater multi-session SLAM algorithms.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same depth-correction step could be applied to any monocular visual-inertial system that lacks a barometer, not only the particular SLAM package used here.
  • If the linear depth regression remains accurate across larger depth ranges, the method could extend from shallow wrecks to deeper archaeological sites.
  • Natural features that persist between dives may eventually replace physical calibration targets for session alignment, lowering logistical overhead.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents a multi-session underwater mapping pipeline that fuses monocular visual-inertial data from consumer GoPro cameras with sparse water-depth readings from a dive computer. SVIn2 produces scaled keyframe trajectories and sparse maps per dive; dive-computer depth is aligned via cross-correlation and linear regression to correct the unobservable absolute z-axis; fixed AprilTag targets (when present) supply rigid transforms that place sessions into a common frame; the resulting keyframes and pose priors are fed to COLMAP for global bundle adjustment and dense multi-view stereo / Poisson reconstruction. The system is demonstrated on three dives totaling >300 k frames of the Pamir shipwreck, producing the first joint exterior-plus-interior reconstruction of the site. Four VIO datasets and open-source code are released.

Significance. If the metric claims hold, the work supplies a practical, low-cost route to multi-session metric mapping of large underwater structures without AUVs or synchronized stereo rigs. The combination of SVIn2 keyframe selection, absolute-depth injection, and COLMAP pose-prior refinement is a useful systems contribution for the underwater robotics community; the public datasets and Dockerized pipeline further increase impact. The demonstration that both exterior and accessible interior of a ~50 m wreck can be reconstructed from ordinary dive gear is of clear interest to archaeology and infrastructure inspection.

major comments (2)
  1. Sections III-B, III-D and IV: the central claim of a correctly scaled multi-session dense reconstruction rests on two unvalidated steps—the underwater pinhole + radial-tangential calibration behind flat ports and the single global affine (time-shift + depth-offset) correction of SVIn2 z against 0.1 Hz dive-computer readings. No quantitative pose, scale or reconstruction metrics are reported (no ATE/RPE, no reconstructed-vs-known target dimensions, no ship-length check against the stated ~50 m, no comparison with stereo or other baselines). Qualitative trajectory overlays and visual mesh inspection alone do not establish metric correctness; a global affine fit cannot remove local VIO drift over 40+ min trajectories. At least one absolute-scale validation (e.g., measured target size or known wreck length) is required to support the claim.
  2. Section III-E and Fig. 5: multi-session alignment relies on averaging Euler angles of a small number of target observations and discarding outliers beyond one standard deviation. No residual alignment error, covariance, or sensitivity analysis is provided, nor is it shown how residual misalignment propagates into the subsequent COLMAP bundle adjustment. Because the common-frame claim is load-bearing for the multi-session contribution, a quantitative residual (e.g., RMS target-pose discrepancy after transform) should be reported.
minor comments (5)
  1. Section III-B: the Pinax model is cited but not used; a short quantitative statement of the residual refraction error of the adopted pinhole approximation (or a reference to prior validation under similar conditions) would strengthen the calibration discussion.
  2. Figures 2–3 and 5: axis labels and units are missing or hard to read; adding them would improve readability of the depth-alignment results.
  3. Section IV-A: keyframe counts are given (3 699 / 4 464 / 5 402 / 8 285) but total frame counts per session and the exact keyframe-selection criteria of SVIn2 are not restated; a one-sentence reminder would help reproducibility.
  4. Related Work: recent underwater Gaussian-splatting / NeRF papers are surveyed, yet the geometric accuracy limitations of those methods relative to classical MVS are only briefly noted; a clearer statement of why COLMAP MVS was preferred for metric reconstruction would be useful.
  5. Typographical: “Joshiet al.” and similar missing spaces appear in several places; “GLOMAP” is mentioned without a citation number in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: experimental systems pipeline with ordinary sensor-alignment fittings, not a derivation that reduces to its inputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper describes a practical multi-session mapping pipeline (SVIn2 keyframes + dive-computer depth correction via cross-correlation/linear regression + target-based rigid alignment + COLMAP BA/dense recon) applied to three GoPro dives of the Pamir wreck. Depth offsets and time shifts (Sec. III-D, Figs. 2-3) and target-to-target transforms (Sec. III-E, Eqs. 1-5) are fitted once for synchronization and multi-session registration; they are never re-used as 'predictions' of the same quantities, nor do any equations claim to derive reconstruction quality or metric scale from first principles that already encode the result. Self-citations (SVIn2 [11], Joshi et al. [10], etc.) simply reuse previously published open-source components; none supply a uniqueness theorem or ansatz that forces the central claim. Qualitative trajectory overlays, target coincidence after alignment, and visual meshes (Figs. 5-12) constitute the empirical demonstration. No self-definitional loop, fitted-input-as-prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chain exists. Score 0 is therefore the correct, proportionate finding for this class of robotics systems paper.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard SLAM observability results, an approximate underwater camera model, and several fitted alignment parameters (time shifts, depth offsets, target-pose averages). No new physical entities are postulated; free parameters are the usual sensor-calibration and registration constants required by any multi-session pipeline.

free parameters (3)
  • time_shift_per_session = 289.8 s / 25.94 s / 29.91 s
    Cross-correlation lag between SVIn2 z-series and dive-computer depth (289.8 s, 25.94 s, 29.91 s) is fitted per dive and applied as a rigid time offset.
  • depth_offset_per_session = 7.74 m / 8.11 m / 10.95 m
    Linear-regression intercept that maps SVIn2 z to absolute water depth (7.74 m, 8.11 m, 10.95 m).
  • target_pose_average
    Arithmetic mean of inlier tag translations and Euler angles used to obtain a single rigid transform between sessions; the 1-sigma outlier threshold is chosen by hand.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Roll and pitch are observable from visual-inertial measurements while absolute position and yaw are not (standard VI observability).
    Invoked in the introduction and Section III-D to justify the need for external depth.
  • domain assumption The pinhole camera model with radial-tangential distortion adequately approximates a GoPro behind a flat-port housing when the camera is close to the window.
    Stated in Section III-B; no Pinax or refractive model is used.
  • domain assumption Fixed calibration targets observed in multiple sessions supply a rigid SE(3) transform that correctly aligns the sessions.
    Core of the multi-session alignment procedure in Section III-E.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Mapping Pamir: Multi-Session Visual-Inertial SLAM and 3D Reconstruction of an Underwater Shipwreck." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TQ5G3PTU

@misc{pith2026260710925,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Mapping Pamir: Multi-Session Visual-Inertial SLAM and 3D Reconstruction of an Underwater Shipwreck},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TQ5G3PTU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.10925}
}
read the original abstract

This paper presents a framework for multi-session mapping of underwater environments utilizing an affordable action camera. The Visual-Inertial data are augmented by water depth recordings from a dive computer. SVIn2, an open-source VI-SLAM framework, is utilized to generate a trajectory and a sparse reconstruction for each session. Utilizing the keyframes extracted from SVIn2 and the estimated camera poses, a Structure-from-Motion (SfM) framework, COLMAP, is employed for global optimization and to produce a dense reconstruction of the target environment. The presence of calibration targets at fixed locations, when available, is used to estimate the coordinate transformation between different data collection sessions, thus transforming the different sessions into the same coordinate frame. The proposed pipeline is employed for the mapping of a shipwreck off the coast of Barbados. For the first time, both the exterior and the accessible interior parts of the wreck were mapped in two sessions, while a third session employed two cameras with different fields of view.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.10925 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. GoPro setup deployed over the Pamir shipwreck, Barbados. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. (a) The SVIn2 z-coordinates (red) and the dive computer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The depth estimates for the other two datasets (Pamir1 and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The 4-by-2 and the 5-by-4 targets at Pamir wreck, which [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The left figure presents the second and third trajectory as they were produced by SVIn2; please note that each trajectory starts [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: 2024 deployment at the Pamir shipwreck, Barbados. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Full sparse reconstruction of the Pamir shipwreck from the two 2025 sessions. (a) Top view. (b) Side view of the wreck. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Segments of the dense reconstruction from COLMAP presenting details of the mapped structure. (a) 2024: Top view showing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Poisson mesh of selected frames from Pamir1. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Details from the Poisson reconstruction. (a) Top view of the bow of the wreck, visible is the crane that has fallen into the cargo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Mars (1564): the initial archaeological investigations of a great 16th-century swedish warship,

    N. Eriksson and J. R ¨onnby, “Mars (1564): the initial archaeological investigations of a great 16th-century swedish warship,”Int. J. Naut. Archaeol., 2017

    2017

  2. [2]

    Reconstructing pavlopetri: Mapping the world’s oldest submerged town using stereo-vision,

    I. Mahon, O. Pizarro, M. Johnson-Roberson, A. Friedman, S. B. Williams, and J. C. Henderson, “Reconstructing pavlopetri: Mapping the world’s oldest submerged town using stereo-vision,” inICRA, 2011

    2011

  3. [3]

    The 4th-century bc shipwreck at mazotos, cyprus: new techniques and methodologies in the 3d mapping of shipwreck excavations,

    S. Demesticha, D. Skarlatos, and A. Neophytou, “The 4th-century bc shipwreck at mazotos, cyprus: new techniques and methodologies in the 3d mapping of shipwreck excavations,”J. Field Archaeol., 2014. (a) (b) Fig. 9: Full sparse reconstruction of the Pamir shipwreck from the two 2025 sessions. (a) Top view. (b) Side view of the wreck. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) F...

    2014

  4. [4]

    Visually mapping the RMS Titanic: Conservative covariance estimates for SLAM information filters,

    R. M. Eustice, H. Singh, J. J. Leonard, and M. R. Walter, “Visually mapping the RMS Titanic: Conservative covariance estimates for SLAM information filters,”Int. J. Robot. Res., 2006

    2006

  5. [5]

    Close range photogrammetry

    D. Gillies, “Close range photogrammetry.”Photogram. Record, 2015

    2015

  6. [6]

    Structure-from-motion on shallow reefs and beaches: potential and limitations of consumer-grade drones to reconstruct topography and bathymetry,

    C. G. David, N. Kohl, E. Casella, A. Rovere, P. Ballesteros, and T. Schlurmann, “Structure-from-motion on shallow reefs and beaches: potential and limitations of consumer-grade drones to reconstruct topography and bathymetry,”Coral Reefs, 2021

    2021

  7. [7]

    Experimental comparison of open source vision-based state estimation algorithms,

    A. Quattrini Li, A. Coskun, S. M. Doherty, S. Ghasemlou, A. S. Jagtap, M. Modasshir, S. Rahman, A. Singh, M. Xanthidis, J. M. O’Kane, and I. Rekleitis, “Experimental comparison of open source vision-based state estimation algorithms,” inISER, 2016

    2016

  8. [8]

    Experimental Comparison of Open Source Visual- Inertial-Based State Estimation Algorithms in the Underwater Do- main,

    B. Joshi, S. Rahman, M. Kalaitzakis, B. Cain, J. Johnson, M. Xan- thidis, N. Karapetyan, A. Hernandez, A. Quattrini Li, N. Vitzilaios, and I. Rekleitis, “Experimental Comparison of Open Source Visual- Inertial-Based State Estimation Algorithms in the Underwater Do- main,” inIROS, 2019

    2019

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Computer vision applications in underwater robotics and oceanography,

    M. J. Islam, A. Quattrini Li, Y . A. Girdhar, and I. Rekleitis, “Computer vision applications in underwater robotics and oceanography,” in Computer Vision: Challenges, Trends, and Opportunities, M. A. R. Ahad, U. Mahbub, M. Turk, and R. Hartley, Eds., 2024

    2024

  2. [10]

    High definition, inexpensive, underwater mapping,

    B. Joshi, M. Xanthidis, S. Rahman, and I. Rekleitis, “High definition, inexpensive, underwater mapping,” inICRA, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    SVIn2: A Multi-sensor Fusion-based Underwater SLAM System,

    S. Rahman, A. Quattrini Li, and I. Rekleitis, “SVIn2: A Multi-sensor Fusion-based Underwater SLAM System,”Int. J. Robot. Res., 2022

    2022

  4. [12]

    Keyframe-based visual–inertial odometry using nonlinear optimiza- tion,

    S. Leutenegger, S. Lynen, M. Bosse, R. Siegwart, and P. Furgale, “Keyframe-based visual–inertial odometry using nonlinear optimiza- tion,”Int. J. Robot. Res., 2015

    2015

  5. [13]

    Camera-imu-based localization: Observability analysis and consis- tency improvement,

    J. A. Hesch, D. G. Kottas, S. L. Bowman, and S. I. Roumeliotis, “Camera-imu-based localization: Observability analysis and consis- tency improvement,”Int. J. Robot. Res., 2014

    2014

  6. [14]

    Observability analysis of aided ins with heterogeneous features of points, lines, and planes,

    Y . Yang and G. Huang, “Observability analysis of aided ins with heterogeneous features of points, lines, and planes,”IEEE Trans. Robot., 2019

    2019

  7. [15]

    Real-Time Dense 3D Mapping of Underwater Environments,

    W. Wang, B. Joshi, N. Burgdorfer, K. Batsos, A. Quattrini Li, P. Mordohai, and I. Rekleitis, “Real-Time Dense 3D Mapping of Underwater Environments,” inICRA, 2023. (a) (b) (c) Fig. 12: Details from the Poisson reconstruction. (a) Top view of the bow of the wreck, visible is th...

    2023

  8. [16]

    Structure-from-motion revisited,

    J. L. Sch ¨onberger and J.-M. Frahm, “Structure-from-motion revisited,” inCVPR, 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    3D Reconstruction of Underwater Structures,

    C. Beall, B. J. Lawrence, V . Ila, and F. Dellaert, “3D Reconstruction of Underwater Structures,” inIROS, 2010

    2010

  10. [18]

    Robust underwater visual SLAM fusing acoustic sensing,

    E. Vargas, R. Scona, J. S. Willners, T. Luczynski, Y . Cao, S. Wang, and Y . R. Petillot, “Robust underwater visual SLAM fusing acoustic sensing,” inICRA, 2021

    2021

  11. [19]

    Tightly-Coupled Visual- Inertial-Pressure Fusion Using Forward and Backward IMU Prein- tegration,

    C. Hu, S. Zhu, Y . Liang, and W. Song, “Tightly-Coupled Visual- Inertial-Pressure Fusion Using Forward and Backward IMU Prein- tegration,”IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom., 2022

    2022

  12. [20]

    Underwa- ter Stereo,

    J. Queiroz-Neto, R. Carceroni, W. Barros, and M. Campos, “Underwa- ter Stereo,” inBrazilian Symposium on Computer Graphics and Image Processing, 2004

    2004

  13. [21]

    NeRF: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,

    B. Mildenhall, P. P. Srinivasan, M. Tancik, J. T. Barron, R. Ramamoor- thi, and R. Ng, “NeRF: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,” inECCV, 2020

    2020

  14. [22]

    A Review of Recent Ad- vances in 3D Gaussian Splatting for Optimization and Reconstruction,

    J. Luo, T. Huang, W. Wang, and W. Feng, “A Review of Recent Ad- vances in 3D Gaussian Splatting for Optimization and Reconstruction,” Image Vis. Comput., 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering

    B. Kerbl, G. Kopanas, T. Leimk ¨uhler, and G. Drettakis, “3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.”ACM Trans. Graph., 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    3D Gaussian Splatting as New Era: A Survey,

    B. Fei, J. Xu, R. Zhang, Q. Zhou, W. Yang, and Y . He, “3D Gaussian Splatting as New Era: A Survey,”IEEE Trans. Vision Compututer Graphics, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Seathru-nerf: Neural radiance fields in scattering media,

    D. Levy, A. Peleg, N. Pearl, D. Rosenbaum, D. Akkaynak, S. Korman, and T. Treibitz, “Seathru-nerf: Neural radiance fields in scattering media,” inCVPR, 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    Water- NeRF: Neural Radiance Fields for Underwater Scenes,

    A. V . Sethuraman, M. S. Ramanagopal, and K. A. Skinner, “Water- NeRF: Neural Radiance Fields for Underwater Scenes,” inOCEANS, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Beyond NeRF Underwater: Learning Neural Reflectance Fields for True Color Correction of Marine Imagery,

    T. Zhang and M. Johnson-Roberson, “Beyond NeRF Underwater: Learning Neural Reflectance Fields for True Color Correction of Marine Imagery,”IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom., 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Neural underwater scene representation,

    Y . Tang, C. Zhu, R. Wan, C. Xu, and B. Shi, “Neural underwater scene representation,” inCVPR, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Aquatic-GS: A Hy- brid 3D Representation for Underwater Scenes,

    S. Liu, J. Lu, Z. Gu, J. Li, and Y . Deng, “Aquatic-GS: A Hy- brid 3D Representation for Underwater Scenes,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.00239, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Seasplat: Representing un- derwater scenes with 3d Gaussian splatting and a physically grounded image formation model,

    D. Yang, J. J. Leonard, and Y . Girdhar, “Seasplat: Representing un- derwater scenes with 3d Gaussian splatting and a physically grounded image formation model,” inICRA, 2025

    2025

  23. [31]

    RecGS: Removing Water Caustic with Recurrent Gaussian Splatting,

    T. Zhang, W. Zhi, B. Meyers, N. Durrant, K. Huang, J. Mangelson, C. Barbalata, and M. Johnson-Roberson, “RecGS: Removing Water Caustic with Recurrent Gaussian Splatting,”IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom., 2025

    2025

  24. [32]

    Freshwater fish habitat complexity mapping using above and underwater structure-from-motion photogrammetry,

    M. Kalacska, O. Lucanus, L. Sousa, T. Vieira, and J. P. Arroyo- Mora, “Freshwater fish habitat complexity mapping using above and underwater structure-from-motion photogrammetry,”Remote Sens., 2018

    2018

  25. [33]

    Accuracy assessment of underwater photogrammetric three dimensional modelling for coral reefs,

    T. Guo, A. Capra, M. Troyer, A. Gr ¨un, A. J. Brooks, J. L. Hench, R. J. Schmitt, S. J. Holbrook, and M. Dubbini, “Accuracy assessment of underwater photogrammetric three dimensional modelling for coral reefs,”Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., 2016

    2016

  26. [34]

    A quick, easy and non-invasive method to quantify coral growth rates using photogrammetry and 3d model comparisons,

    I. D. Lange and C. T. Perry, “A quick, easy and non-invasive method to quantify coral growth rates using photogrammetry and 3d model comparisons,”Methods Ecol. Evol., 2020

    2020

  27. [35]

    Fine-grained 3d modeling and semantic mapping of coral reefs using photogrammetric computer vision and machine learning,

    J. Zhong, M. Li, H. Zhang, and J. Qin, “Fine-grained 3d modeling and semantic mapping of coral reefs using photogrammetric computer vision and machine learning,”Sensors, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Cutting-edge 3d reconstruction solutions for underwater coral reef images: A review and comparison,

    J. Zhong, M. Li, A. Gruen, K. Schindler, X. Liao, and Q. Guo, “Cutting-edge 3d reconstruction solutions for underwater coral reef images: A review and comparison,”ISPRS J. Photogramm. Remote Sens., vol. 230, pp. 779–803, 2025

    2025

  29. [37]

    Return to antikythera: Multi- session SLAM based AUV mapping of a first century bc wreck site,

    S. B. Williams, O. Pizarro, and B. Foley, “Return to antikythera: Multi- session SLAM based AUV mapping of a first century bc wreck site,” inFSR, 2016

    2016

  30. [38]

    A trajectory-based ap- proach to multi-session underwater visual slam using global image signatures,

    A. Burguera Burguera and F. Bonin-Font, “A trajectory-based ap- proach to multi-session underwater visual slam using global image signatures,”J. Mar . Sci. Eng., 2019

    2019

  31. [39]

    Multi-session underwater pose-graph slam using inter-session opti-acoustic two-view factor,

    H. Jang, S. Yoon, and A. Kim, “Multi-session underwater pose-graph slam using inter-session opti-acoustic two-view factor,” inICRA, 2021

    2021

  32. [40]

    Long-term mapping techniques for ship hull inspection and surveillance using an autonomous underwater vehicle,

    P. Ozog, N. Carlevaris-Bianco, A. Kim, and R. M. Eustice, “Long-term mapping techniques for ship hull inspection and surveillance using an autonomous underwater vehicle,”J. Field Robot., 2016

    2016

  33. [41]

    B. Joshi. (2022) gopro ros: Software for converting a GoPro video into a ROS 1 bagfile. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/ AutonomousFieldRoboticsLab/gopro ros

    2022

  34. [42]

    The development of camera calibration methods and models,

    T. A. Clarke and J. G. Fryer, “The development of camera calibration methods and models,”Photogramm. Rec., 1998

    1998

  35. [43]

    A flexible new technique for camera calibration,

    Z. Zhang, “A flexible new technique for camera calibration,”IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 2000

    2000

  36. [44]

    Review on camera calibration,

    W. Qi, F. Li, and L. Zhenzhong, “Review on camera calibration,” in Chin. Control Decis. Conf., 2010

    2010

  37. [45]

    Effects of light refraction on the accuracy of camera calibration and reconstruction in underwater motion analysis,

    Y .-H. Kwpron and J. B. Casebolt, “Effects of light refraction on the accuracy of camera calibration and reconstruction in underwater motion analysis,”Sports Biomech., 2006

    2006

  38. [46]

    Underwater Dome-Port Camera Calibration: Modeling of Refraction and Offset through N-Sphere Camera Model,

    M. Roznere, A. K. Pediredla, S. E. Lensgraf, Y . Girdhar, and A. Quat- trini Li, “Underwater Dome-Port Camera Calibration: Modeling of Refraction and Offset through N-Sphere Camera Model,” inICRA, 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    The pinax-model for accurate and efficient refraction correction of underwater cameras in flat-pane housings,

    T. Łuczy ´nski, M. Pfingsthorn, and A. Birk, “The pinax-model for accurate and efficient refraction correction of underwater cameras in flat-pane housings,”Ocean Eng., 2017

    2017

  40. [48]

    An online self- calibrating refractive camera model with application to underwater odometry,

    M. Singh, M. Dharmadhikari, and K. Alexis, “An online self- calibrating refractive camera model with application to underwater odometry,” inICRA, 2024

    2024

  41. [49]

    Distinctive image features from scale-invariant key- points,

    D. G. Lowe, “Distinctive image features from scale-invariant key- points,”Int. J. Comput. Vis., 2004

    2004

  42. [50]

    Global Structure-from-Motion Revisited,

    L. Pan, D. Bar ´ath, M. Pollefeys, and J. L. Sch ¨onberger, “Global Structure-from-Motion Revisited,” inECCV, 2024

    2024

  43. [51]

    Pixel- wise View Selection for Unstructured Multi-View Stereo,

    J. L. Sch ¨onberger, E. Zheng, J.-M. Frahm, and M. Pollefeys, “Pixel- wise View Selection for Unstructured Multi-View Stereo,” inECCV, 2016

    2016

  44. [52]

    Screened Poisson Surface Reconstruc- tion,

    M. Kazhdan and H. Hoppe, “Screened Poisson Surface Reconstruc- tion,”ACM Trans. Graph., 2013

    2013

  45. [53]

    MIMC-VINS: A versatile and resilient multi-imu multi-camera visual-inertial navigation sys- tem,

    K. Eckenhoff, P. Geneva, and G. Huang, “MIMC-VINS: A versatile and resilient multi-imu multi-camera visual-inertial navigation sys- tem,”IEEE Trans. Robot., 2021

    2021

  46. [54]

    Multi-visual-inertial system: Analysis, calibration, and estimation,

    Y . Yang, P. Geneva, and G. Huang, “Multi-visual-inertial system: Analysis, calibration, and estimation,”Int. J. Robot. Res., 2024

    2024

  47. [55]

    A lightweight and accurate localization algorithm using multiple inertial measurement units,

    M. Zhang, X. Xu, Y . Chen, and M. Li, “A lightweight and accurate localization algorithm using multiple inertial measurement units,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Autom., 2020

    2020

Pith tools

Reviewed July 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.