Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 8 cited by

Depth Anything with Any Prior

T0 review · 3 major / 6 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 One depth model now takes any partial depth measurement—sparse, blurry, or hole-filled—and returns dense metric depth, without task-specific training.

desk verdict A genuinely unified any-prior depth model with a clean coarse-to-fine design, but the current manuscript overstates its benchmark wins and needs a thorough edit before it is referee-ready. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.10565 v1 pith:5OJOH5DF submitted 2025-05-15 cs.CV

Zehan Wang , Siyu Chen , Lihe Yang , Jialei Wang , Ziang Zhang , Hengshuang Zhao , Zhou Zhao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords depthcompletionsuper-resolutioninpaintingmetricpriorzero-shotgeneralizationmonocularestimationpixel-levelaffinealignmentconditionedMDE
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 sets out to prove that a single framework can absorb any incomplete metric depth prior—sparse LiDAR or SfM points, low-resolution sensor maps, missing regions, or any mixture of these—and, guided by an RGB image, output dense, detailed, metrically accurate depth in a zero-shot fashion. The authors argue that previous methods each handle only one pattern of incomplete depth, so they fail on mixed or unseen priors. Prior Depth Anything is their proposed unification: first explicitly align a frozen monocular depth prediction to the metric prior at the pixel level using per-pixel least-squares scale-and-shift fits, then refine the result with a depth-conditioned monocular model that merges metric values with predicted geometry. Across seven real-world datasets the method claims performance matching or beating task-specific systems for depth completion, super-resolution, and inpainting, while remaining the only approach that handles all three at once.

What carries the argument

The coarse metric alignment step is the load-bearing mechanism: for each missing pixel it finds the K nearest valid prior points, fits an optimal scale s and shift t by weighted least squares (weighted by inverse squared distance) between the frozen MDE prediction and the metric prior at those points, then fills the missing pixel as s·D_pred + t. This transforms every prior pattern into the same intermediate domain, preserving the prior's metric values while inheriting the prediction's fine geometry. The fine structure refinement then feeds the normalized pre-filled prior and normalized prediction into a conditioned MDE model through zero-initialized convolutional layers, so the model learns to correct noisy millimeter-level priors while keeping the metric accuracy. Test-time model switching is enabled by normalizing the prediction before conditioning and applying the inverse normalization after the conditioned model produces its output.

What would settle it

A controlled experiment on a depth-completion benchmark like KITTI or NYUv2 that densely samples occlusion boundaries, then provides a decreasing sequence of valid prior points (e.g., 500, 100, 50, 20 pixels) and measures whether the final refined output's error rises sharply when the pre-filled values cross depth edges. If the error increases in proportion to the number of pixels whose K nearest neighbors cross a depth discontinuity, the core alignment assumption is doing the work; if the refinement stage fully recovers, the strong claim of robustness to any prior holds. A second check is to feed a prior that is deliberately non-affine within each local neighborhood (e.g., valid points sampled from two different walls at different depths) and see whether the model propagates the affine fit error into the filled region.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper discovers that a frozen monocular depth estimation model's relative prediction can act as a universal geometric scaffold for any incomplete metric prior, and that pixel-wise affine alignment turns that scaffold into a dense metric pre-fill which a conditioned MDE model can then refine. The central claim is that coarse-to-fine integration—pre-fill by per-pixel scale-shift fits to the K nearest valid prior points, then refine with a conditioned MDE that sees both the pre-filled metric prior and the normalized relative prediction—closes the gap between any prior pattern and a dense metric depth map. The authors show the pre-fill alone narrows the domain gap among prior types, so a model trained on just sparse points generalizes to low-resolution and missing-area priors. The refinement stage is what corrects noisy measurements and improves the final output over the pre-fill. The result is a single model that claims state-of-the-art or competitive zero-shot results on depth completion, super-resolution, and inpainting across seven datasets, and that uniquely handles mixed priors.

Load-bearing premise

The pre-fill assumes that the K nearest valid prior points to any missing pixel lie on the same local surface as that pixel, so a single scale and shift can convert the relative prediction into metric depth there; when the prior is extremely sparse or the scene has depth discontinuities, the nearest neighbors can straddle multiple surfaces and the filled value is wrong before the refinement stage ever sees it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A single prior-based depth model can replace three separate specialist pipelines (completion, super-resolution, inpainting) in applications like AR/VR scene understanding, 3D reconstruction, and robotic navigation. If the central claim is correct, those applications no longer need to know which depth sensor or which failure mode produced the partial measurement.
  • Test-time swapping of the frozen MDE model (e.g., Depth Anything v2 ViT-G or Depth Pro for a stronger one) improves accuracy without retraining, while smaller components keep the pipeline efficient, so users can trade accuracy for latency per deployment.
  • Real-world depth measurements from noisy sensors can be refined with the metric prior preserved; the paper shows the model can correct blurred edges in widely used benchmark ground truths, meaning downstream tasks like 3D Gaussian editing and SLAM could consume cleaner dense depth maps.
  • The coarse metric alignment's pattern-agnostic pre-fill is what drives generalization, so the framework should absorb novel prior patterns not in the training set as long as the frozen MDE supplies reasonable relative geometry for the scene.
  • Because the conditioning is on normalized prior and prediction, the framework is compatible with any future relative-depth foundation model, so it improves automatically as MDE models improve.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension the paper does not explore is using the same coarse-to-fine integration for video or multi-frame depth, where temporal consistency between pre-fills could smooth noisy sensor streams and correct flicker in the refined output.
  • The pre-fill's reliance on local affine fits suggests a harder test than any single dataset: scenes with sharp occlusion boundaries and very sparse priors (a few hundred points) may expose whether the refinement stage can recover structural errors, not just sensor noise. A benchmark comparing pre-fill accuracy vs refinement recovery on occlusion-heavy scenes would quantify this.
  • The conditioned MDE is trained on synthetic priors sampled from Hypersim and vKITTI, so a distribution shift to real-sensor noise patterns (e.g., ToF multipath interference or LiDAR beam divergence) is where the claimed generalization is least certain; testing on real captured low-resolution and partial-depth cameras beyond ARKitScenes and RGB-D-D would be a direct stress test.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Prior Depth Anything, a single framework for dense metric depth estimation from an RGB image plus an arbitrary incomplete metric depth prior (sparse points, low-resolution depth, missing areas, or mixtures). The method first uses a frozen MDE model to obtain a relative depth prediction, pre-fills missing prior pixels via per-pixel affine alignment to the K nearest valid prior points (Eqs. 2-4), and then refines the pre-filled map with a conditioned MDE model trained on synthetic data. The paper reports zero-shot results on 7 real-world datasets for depth completion, super-resolution, and inpainting, and demonstrates an application to refining VGGT predictions. The core design is clearly described and the experimental study is broad, but the paper's central claim of matching or surpassing task-specific methods is not uniformly supported by its own tables.

Significance. If accepted with appropriately qualified claims, the central idea of converting all prior patterns into a shared pre-filled domain and then learning to refine it is useful and practical. Strengths include the systematic zero-shot evaluation across 7 datasets and 9 prior patterns, the clean ablations (Tables 6-8, 12) isolating the contribution of alignment, re-weighting, and the two conditioning streams, the test-time MDE switching (Table 9), and the efficiency advantage over diffusion-based baselines (Table 10). The main weaknesses are an overbroad claim in the abstract and conclusion, an unspecified de-normalization step, and a lack of failure-mode analysis for the KNN-based pre-filling at depth discontinuities and extreme sparsity. These issues are addressable, but they require more than local edits.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract; Section 4.3, Table 4] The central claim that the method is 'matching or even surpassing previous task-specific methods' is contradicted by the paper's own tables. On ARKitScenes super-resolution (Table 4), PromptDA achieves AbsRel 1.34 / RMSE 0.0347 while PriorDA (DAv2-B+ViT-B) achieves 1.94 / 0.0404; in depth completion (Table 3), Marigold-DC outperforms all PriorDA variants on ScanNet LiDAR (1.76 vs 2.15/2.19) and Omni-DC outperforms them on KITTI SfM (3.34 vs 3.35/3.73). The abstract and conclusion therefore overstate the result. Please qualify the claim to 'competitive or superior in most settings' and discuss where task-specific methods retain an advantage.
  2. [Section 3.2, Eq. (4); Table 3 'Extreme'; Tables 6 and 12] The coarse alignment assumes that the K nearest valid points and the query pixel lie on a locally smooth surface, so that a single affine map (s,t) is valid. When the prior is extremely sparse (100 points, Table 3 'Extreme') or when the KNN support spans a depth discontinuity, the fitted affine map is a blend of two surfaces and the pre-filled value is systematically biased. The paper does not quantify how often this occurs, nor how well the refinement stage recovers from it; the aggregate ablations in Tables 6 and 12 can mask this failure mode. Please add an analysis, for example pre-fill and final error as a function of distance to the nearest depth boundary or of local valid-point density, and discuss the impact on the 'Extreme' setting.
  3. [Section 3.3 and 3.4] The de-normalization from the normalized metric and geometry conditions back to the ground-truth scale is not specified. The text states 'we apply the de-normalization transformation to convert the output into the ground truth scale' but gives no equation or procedure. This is necessary for reproducibility and for understanding how the metric scale is recovered after the [0,1] normalization. Please state the exact transformation (for example, re-scaling by per-image prior statistics) and indicate where it is applied in the pipeline.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3.2, Eq. (1)] Equation (1) sets the pre-filled map at valid pixels to Dpred(x,y), which contradicts the text 'inherits all the valid pixels in Dprior' and the surrounding description; it should be Dprior(x,y).
  2. [Section 3.4] The k-value is set to 5, but Section 3.2 calls the alignment 'parameter-free'; since K is a hyperparameter, consider using 'with no learned parameters' or 'unlearned' to avoid confusion.
  3. [Eq. (4)] The denominator is written as ||(x_hat,y_hat)-(x_k,y_k)||_2, which can be read as squared Euclidean distance, while the text says 'based on its distance'; please clarify whether the weight is 1/d or 1/d^2.
  4. [Table 2] The entry 'Depth Pro+ViT-B2.01' appears to be missing a space and is difficult to read; please check the table formatting.
  5. [Section 4.3, text] The sentence 'On these two benchmarks, our method achieves leading performance compared to other zero-shot methods' is not supported by Table 4, where PromptDA has lower AbsRel on ARKitScenes; please align the text with the reported data.
  6. [Appendix (after References)] The manuscript contains a long excerpt from the Depth Anything V2 paper (beginning with '5 Depth Anything V2' after the references), which is not part of this paper; it should be removed before submission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the dense depth output is evaluated on unseen real datasets, and the affine alignment is computed on-the-fly from the input prior rather than fitted to test labels.

full rationale

Prior Depth Anything's output is not equivalent to its inputs by construction. The metric prior Dprior enters through Eqs. (2) and (4), which fit a per-pixel scale/shift against the input's own valid pixels, and the dense output is produced by a conditioned MDE trained on synthetic Hypersim/vKITTI and evaluated on unseen real benchmarks. No parameter is fitted to the test sets; the frozen Depth Anything V2 is an externally released, code-reproduced model, so citing it is ordinary reuse rather than a circular load-bearing self-citation. The only internal anomaly is Eq. (1), which literally writes that the pre-filled map equals Dpred at valid pixels, contradicting the sentence that the pre-filled map 'inherits all the valid pixels in Dprior'; this is a typo or notation slip and does not create circularity, because Eq. (2) still fits s,t from Dprior and the final output is judged against independent ground truth. The unspecified scale de-normalization in Sec. 3.3 is a reproducibility gap, not a circular-definition issue.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central mechanism rests on the frozen MDE's relative depth quality, the local-affine assumption in Eq. (2), and the transferability of synthetic noise simulation. The only hand-chosen free parameters in the core pipeline are k and the training prior patterns; the per-pixel scale/shift are computed from the input, not fitted.

free parameters (3)
  • k (number of nearest neighbors in coarse metric alignment) = 5
    Hand-chosen; Table 12 shows insensitivity. Each missing pixel uses K=5 closest valid prior points to fit a local affine map.
  • Training prior pattern parameters = sparse 100-2000 px; downsample x8; square mask 160; equal probability
    Chosen by hand in Section C (supplementary) to simulate priors. Table 13 shows pattern choice has minor effect, so this is not central.
  • VGGT confidence threshold = top 30%
    Used in the Section 5 application demo to select prior pixels; not part of the core model.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A frozen monocular depth model (Depth Anything V2) yields reliable relative geometry for any RGB image.
    Invoked in Section 3.2 to obtain D_pred and in Section 3.3 as the geometry condition. The paper does not prove this; it inherits the base model's generalization.
  • domain assumption Within the K-nearest valid-prior neighborhood of each missing pixel, predicted relative depth and metric prior are related by a single affine transform (scale and shift).
    This is the least-squares model in Eq. (2). It fails at depth discontinuities or when K neighbors span different surfaces, and the paper does not quantify this failure.
  • domain assumption Training on synthetic datasets (Hypersim, vKITTI) with procedurally generated priors and added noise transfers to real sensor priors.
    Section 3.3 and Section C: priors are sampled from perfect GT with noise 'following [66]'. The zero-shot claim depends on this transfer.
  • domain assumption A well-defined de-normalization maps the normalized network output back to metric scale.
    Section 3.3 states de-normalization is applied but does not specify the transformation; presumably it uses the global scale/shift of the pre-filled prior. If the prior is too sparse, the global scale estimate may be unreliable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Depth Anything with Any Prior." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5OJOH5DF

@misc{pith2026250510565,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Depth Anything with Any Prior},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5OJOH5DF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.10565}
}
read the original abstract

This work presents Prior Depth Anything, a framework that combines incomplete but precise metric information in depth measurement with relative but complete geometric structures in depth prediction, generating accurate, dense, and detailed metric depth maps for any scene. To this end, we design a coarse-to-fine pipeline to progressively integrate the two complementary depth sources. First, we introduce pixel-level metric alignment and distance-aware weighting to pre-fill diverse metric priors by explicitly using depth prediction. It effectively narrows the domain gap between prior patterns, enhancing generalization across varying scenarios. Second, we develop a conditioned monocular depth estimation (MDE) model to refine the inherent noise of depth priors. By conditioning on the normalized pre-filled prior and prediction, the model further implicitly merges the two complementary depth sources. Our model showcases impressive zero-shot generalization across depth completion, super-resolution, and inpainting over 7 real-world datasets, matching or even surpassing previous task-specific methods. More importantly, it performs well on challenging, unseen mixed priors and enables test-time improvements by switching prediction models, providing a flexible accuracy-efficiency trade-off while evolving with advancements in MDE models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.10565 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Prior Depth Anything. Considering RGB images, any form of depth prior Dprior, and relative prediction Dpred from a frozen MDE model, coarse metric alignment first explicitly combines the metric data in Dprior and geometry structure in Dpred to fill the incomplete areas in Dprior. Fine structure refinement implicitly merges the complementary information to produce the final metric depth map. value at (ˆx, yˆ) to metr… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Qualitative comparisons with previous methods. The depth prior or error map is shown below each sample. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Error analysis on widely used but indeed noisy benchmarks [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Error analysis on RGB-D-D. RGB image GT & Prior Ours Error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Error analysis on ARKitScenes. 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Error analysis on NYUv2. RGB image GT & Prior Ours Error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Error analysis on ScanNet. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Error analysis on ETH-3D. RGB image GT & Prior Ours Error [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Error analysis on DIODE. 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Error analysis on KITTI. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 8 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Dense Metric Depth Completion from Sparse Direct Time-of-Flight Sensors

    cs.CV 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A dual-branch transformer with masked joint attention completes dense metric depth from sparse dToF sensors, trained entirely on synthetic data and generalizing zero-shot to real devices.

  2. Vision Pretraining for Dense Spatial Perception

    cs.CV 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A boundary-forcing masked modeling paradigm for self-supervised vision pretraining yields a 1B model rivaling 7B models on dense spatial perception tasks.

  3. Manipulation as in Simulation: Enabling Accurate Geometry Perception in Robots

    cs.RO 2025-09 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A learned plug-in that denoises consumer depth cameras to simulation-like metric depth enables zero-shot sim-to-real transfer of depth-only manipulation policies trained on raw simulated depth.

  4. The Multipath Blind Spot: $K$-Agnostic Robust Calibration for Sparse-Anchor Metric Depth from Frozen Foundations

    cs.CV 2026-07 accept novelty 6.5 of 10

    MRAC gates sparse anchors via Theil–Sen + MAD consistency with a frozen foundation's relative depth, repairing multipath outliers that collapse residual-on-CFA and blind VI-Depth while winning 84% of same-backbone cells.

  5. Any to Full: Prompting Depth Anything for Depth Completion in One Stage

    cs.CV 2026-03 accept novelty 6.5 of 10

    Any2Full reformulates depth completion as one-stage scale-prompting of a pretrained monocular depth estimator, yielding domain-general, pattern-agnostic dense metric depth with lower error and higher speed than prior methods.

  6. SimFoundry: Modular and Automated Scene Generation for Policy Learning and Evaluation

    cs.RO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    SimFoundry automates zero-shot real-to-sim scene generation from video, producing digital twins and cousins that enable policy training with 0.911 mean Pearson correlation to real-world results and 17-40% success gain...

  7. Enhancing Glass Surface Reconstruction via Depth Prior for Robot Navigation

    cs.RO 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Local RANSAC alignment of Depth Anything-style priors to raw sensor depth recovers metric glass-surface geometry without training, and the new GlassRecon benchmark shows large gains on severely corrupted hard samples.

  8. Learning to Localize Reference Trajectories in Image-Space for Visual Navigation

    cs.RO 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LoTIS localizes a reference RGB trajectory in the robot's current view, predicting image-space coordinates, visibility, and distance to provide robot-agnostic guidance for navigation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages · cited by 8 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Arkitscenes: A diverse real-world dataset for 3d indoor scene understanding using mobile rgb-d data

    Gilad Baruch, Zhuoyuan Chen, Afshin Dehghan, Tal Dimry, Yuri Feigin, Peter Fu, Thomas Gebauer, Brandon Joffe, Daniel Kurz, Arik Schwartz, et al. Arkitscenes: A diverse real-world dataset for 3d indoor scene understanding using mobile rgb-d data. In NeurIPS, 2021. 5, 6

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Adabins: Depth estimation using adaptive bins

    Shariq Farooq Bhat, Ibraheem Alhashim, and Peter Wonka. Adabins: Depth estimation using adaptive bins. In CVPR,

  3. [3]

    Zoedepth: Zero-shot transfer by com- bining relative and metric depth

    Shariq Farooq Bhat, Reiner Birkl, Diana Wofk, Peter Wonka, and Matthias M ¨uller. Zoedepth: Zero-shot transfer by com- bining relative and metric depth. arXiv:2302.12288, 2023. 5

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Depth pro: Sharp monocular metric depth in less than a second

    Aleksei Bochkovskii, Ama ¨el Delaunoy, Hugo Germain, Marcel Santos, Yichao Zhou, Stephan R Richter, and Vladlen Koltun. Depth pro: Sharp monocular metric depth in less than a second. In ICLR, 2025. 1, 2, 5

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    On the opportunities and risks of foundation models

    Rishi Bommasani, Drew A Hudson, Ehsan Adeli, Russ Alt- man, Simran Arora, Sydney von Arx, Michael S Bern- stein, Jeannette Bohg, Antoine Bosselut, Emma Brunskill, et al. On the opportunities and risks of foundation models. arXiv:2108.07258, 2021. 2

    arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Vir- tual kitti 2

    Yohann Cabon, Naila Murray, and Martin Humenberger. Vir- tual kitti 2. arXiv:2001.10773, 2020. 2, 5

    arXiv 2001

  7. [7]

    Object detection using depth completion and camera-lidar fusion for autonomous driving

    Manuel Carranza-Garc ´ıa, F Javier Gal ´an-Sales, Jos ´e Mar´ıa Luna-Romera, and Jos´e C Riquelme. Object detection using depth completion and camera-lidar fusion for autonomous driving. Integrated Computer-Aided Engineering, 2022. 1

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Learn- ing depth with convolutional spatial propagation network

    Xinjing Cheng, Peng Wang, and Ruigang Yang. Learn- ing depth with convolutional spatial propagation network. TPAMI, 2019. 3

    work page 2019

Show all 66 references
  1. [9]

    Cspn++: Learning context and resource aware convo- lutional spatial propagation networks for depth completion

    Xinjing Cheng, Peng Wang, Chenye Guan, and Ruigang Yang. Cspn++: Learning context and resource aware convo- lutional spatial propagation networks for depth completion. In AAAI, 2020. 3

    2020

  2. [10]

    Luciddreamer: Domain-free gener- ation of 3d gaussian splatting scenes

    Jaeyoung Chung, Suyoung Lee, Hyeongjin Nam, Jaerin Lee, and Kyoung Mu Lee. Luciddreamer: Domain-free gener- ation of 3d gaussian splatting scenes. arXiv:2311.13384,

    arXiv

  3. [11]

    Depth-regularized optimization for 3d gaussian splatting in few-shot images

    Jaeyoung Chung, Jeongtaek Oh, and Kyoung Mu Lee. Depth-regularized optimization for 3d gaussian splatting in few-shot images. In CVPR, 2024. 1, 3

    2024

  4. [12]

    The cityscapes dataset for semantic urban scene understanding

    Marius Cordts, Mohamed Omran, Sebastian Ramos, Timo Rehfeld, Markus Enzweiler, Rodrigo Benenson, Uwe Franke, Stefan Roth, and Bernt Schiele. The cityscapes dataset for semantic urban scene understanding. In CVPR,

  5. [13]

    Scannet: Richly-annotated 3d reconstructions of indoor scenes

    Angela Dai, Angel X Chang, Manolis Savva, Maciej Hal- ber, Thomas Funkhouser, and Matthias Nießner. Scannet: Richly-annotated 3d reconstructions of indoor scenes. In CVPR, 2017. 5, 6, 7

    2017

  6. [14]

    Depth-supervised nerf: Fewer views and faster train- ing for free

    Kangle Deng, Andrew Liu, Jun-Yan Zhu, and Deva Ra- manan. Depth-supervised nerf: Fewer views and faster train- ing for free. In CVPR, 2022. 1

    2022

  7. [15]

    Depth map prediction from a single image using a multi-scale deep net- work

    David Eigen, Christian Puhrsch, and Rob Fergus. Depth map prediction from a single image using a multi-scale deep net- work. In NeurIPS, 2014. 2

    2014

  8. [16]

    Structure and content-guided video synthesis with diffusion models

    Patrick Esser, Johnathan Chiu, Parmida Atighehchian, Jonathan Granskog, and Anastasis Germanidis. Structure and content-guided video synthesis with diffusion models. In ICCV, 2023. 1

    2023

  9. [17]

    Deep ordinal regression net- work for monocular depth estimation

    Huan Fu, Mingming Gong, Chaohui Wang, Kayhan Bat- manghelich, and Dacheng Tao. Deep ordinal regression net- work for monocular depth estimation. In CVPR, 2018. 2

    2018

  10. [18]

    Are we ready for autonomous driving? the kitti vision benchmark suite

    Andreas Geiger, Philip Lenz, and Raquel Urtasun. Are we ready for autonomous driving? the kitti vision benchmark suite. In CVPR, 2012. 5

    2012

  11. [19]

    Vision meets robotics: The kitti dataset

    Andreas Geiger, Philip Lenz, Christoph Stiller, and Raquel 9 Urtasun. Vision meets robotics: The kitti dataset. The inter- national journal of robotics research, 2013. 2

    2013

  12. [20]

    3d visual perception for self-driving cars using a multi-camera system: Calibration, mapping, localization, and obstacle de- tection

    Christian H ¨ane, Lionel Heng, Gim Hee Lee, Friedrich Fraun- dorfer, Paul Furgale, Torsten Sattler, and Marc Pollefeys. 3d visual perception for self-driving cars using a multi-camera system: Calibration, mapping, localization, and obstacle de- tection. Image and Vision Comput...

    2017

  13. [21]

    Lotus: Diffusion-based visual foundation model for high-quality dense prediction

    Jing He, Haodong Li, Wei Yin, Yixun Liang, Leheng Li, Kaiqiang Zhou, Hongbo Zhang, Bingbing Liu, and Ying- Cong Chen. Lotus: Diffusion-based visual foundation model for high-quality dense prediction. In ICLR, 2025. 1, 2

    2025

  14. [22]

    Towards fast and accurate real-world depth super- resolution: Benchmark dataset and baseline

    Lingzhi He, Hongguang Zhu, Feng Li, Huihui Bai, Runmin Cong, Chunjie Zhang, Chunyu Lin, Meiqin Liu, and Yao Zhao. Towards fast and accurate real-world depth super- resolution: Benchmark dataset and baseline. In CVPR, 2021. 1

    2021

  15. [23]

    Towards fast and accurate real-world depth super- resolution: Benchmark dataset and baseline

    Lingzhi He, Hongguang Zhu, Feng Li, Huihui Bai, Runmin Cong, Chunjie Zhang, Chunyu Lin, Meiqin Liu, and Yao Zhao. Towards fast and accurate real-world depth super- resolution: Benchmark dataset and baseline. In CVPR, 2021. 3, 5, 6

    2021

  16. [24]

    Joint depth and color camera calibration with distortion correc- tion

    Daniel Herrera, Juho Kannala, and Janne Heikkil ¨a. Joint depth and color camera calibration with distortion correc- tion. TPAMI, 2012. 1

    2012

  17. [25]

    Metric3d v2: A versatile monocular geomet- ric foundation model for zero-shot metric depth and surface normal estimation

    Mu Hu, Wei Yin, Chi Zhang, Zhipeng Cai, Xiaoxiao Long, Hao Chen, Kaixuan Wang, Gang Yu, Chunhua Shen, and Shaojie Shen. Metric3d v2: A versatile monocular geomet- ric foundation model for zero-shot metric depth and surface normal estimation. TPAMI, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  18. [26]

    Ultralytics YOLO, 2023

    Glenn Jocher, Jing Qiu, and Ayush Chaurasia. Ultralytics YOLO, 2023. 6

    2023

  19. [27]

    Repurpos- ing diffusion-based image generators for monocular depth estimation

    Bingxin Ke, Anton Obukhov, Shengyu Huang, Nando Met- zger, Rodrigo Caye Daudt, and Konrad Schindler. Repurpos- ing diffusion-based image generators for monocular depth estimation. In CVPR, 2024. 1, 2, 3, 5

    2024

  20. [28]

    Solid-state time-of-flight range camera

    Robert Lange and Peter Seitz. Solid-state time-of-flight range camera. IEEE Journal of quantum electronics , 2001. 1

    2001

  21. [29]

    Prompting depth anything for 4k resolution accurate metric depth estimation

    Haotong Lin, Sida Peng, Jingxiao Chen, Songyou Peng, Ji- aming Sun, Minghuan Liu, Hujun Bao, Jiashi Feng, Xiaowei Zhou, and Bingyi Kang. Prompting depth anything for 4k resolution accurate metric depth estimation. In CVPR, 2025. 2, 3, 5

    2025

  22. [30]

    Depthlab: From partial to complete

    Zhiheng Liu, Ka Leong Cheng, Qiuyu Wang, Shuzhe Wang, Hao Ouyang, Bin Tan, Kai Zhu, Yujun Shen, Qifeng Chen, and Ping Luo. Depthlab: From partial to complete. arXiv:2412.18153, 2024. 2, 3, 5

    2024

  23. [31]

    Infusion: Inpainting 3d gaussians via learning depth completion from diffusion prior

    Zhiheng Liu, Hao Ouyang, Qiuyu Wang, Ka Leong Cheng, Jie Xiao, Kai Zhu, Nan Xue, Yu Liu, Yujun Shen, and Yang Cao. Infusion: Inpainting 3d gaussians via learning depth completion from diffusion prior. arXiv:2404.11613, 2024. 1, 3

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Distinctive image features from scale- invariant keypoints

    David G Lowe. Distinctive image features from scale- invariant keypoints. IJCV, 2004. 1, 5

    2004

  25. [33]

    Depth prompting for sensor-agnostic depth estimation

    Jin-Hwi Park, Chanhwi Jeong, Junoh Lee, and Hae-Gon Jeon. Depth prompting for sensor-agnostic depth estimation. In CVPR, 2024. 3

    2024

  26. [34]

    Towards robust monocular depth estimation: Mixing datasets for zero-shot cross-dataset transfer

    Ren ´e Ranftl, Katrin Lasinger, David Hafner, Konrad Schindler, and Vladlen Koltun. Towards robust monocular depth estimation: Mixing datasets for zero-shot cross-dataset transfer. TPAMI, 2020. 1, 2

    2020

  27. [35]

    The relative importance of depth cues and semantic edges for indoor mobility using simulated prosthetic vision in immersive virtual reality

    Alex Rasla and Michael Beyeler. The relative importance of depth cues and semantic edges for indoor mobility using simulated prosthetic vision in immersive virtual reality. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM symposium on virtual reality software and technology, 2022. 1

    2022

  28. [36]

    Hypersim: A photorealistic syn- thetic dataset for holistic indoor scene understanding

    Mike Roberts, Jason Ramapuram, Anurag Ranjan, Atulit Kumar, Miguel Angel Bautista, Nathan Paczan, Russ Webb, and Joshua M Susskind. Hypersim: A photorealistic syn- thetic dataset for holistic indoor scene understanding. In ICCV, 2021. 2, 5

    2021

  29. [37]

    Dense depth pri- ors for neural radiance fields from sparse input views

    Barbara Roessle, Jonathan T Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Pratul P Srinivasan, and Matthias Nießner. Dense depth pri- ors for neural radiance fields from sparse input views. In CVPR, 2022. 1, 3

    2022

  30. [38]

    High-resolution image syn- thesis with latent diffusion models

    Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Bj¨orn Ommer. High-resolution image syn- thesis with latent diffusion models. In CVPR, 2022. 5

    2022

  31. [39]

    Orb: An efficient alternative to sift or surf

    Ethan Rublee, Vincent Rabaud, Kurt Konolige, and Gary Bradski. Orb: An efficient alternative to sift or surf. InICCV,

  32. [40]

    Structure- from-motion revisited

    Johannes L Schonberger and Jan-Michael Frahm. Structure- from-motion revisited. In CVPR, 2016. 1

    2016

  33. [41]

    A multi-view stereo benchmark with high- resolution images and multi-camera videos

    Thomas Schops, Johannes L Schonberger, Silvano Galliani, Torsten Sattler, Konrad Schindler, Marc Pollefeys, and An- dreas Geiger. A multi-view stereo benchmark with high- resolution images and multi-camera videos. In CVPR, 2017. 5

    2017

  34. [42]

    Indoor segmentation and support inference from rgbd images

    Nathan Silberman, Derek Hoiem, Pushmeet Kohli, and Rob Fergus. Indoor segmentation and support inference from rgbd images. In ECCV, 2012. 2, 5, 6, 7

    2012

  35. [43]

    A framework for immersive virtual environments (five): Speculations on the role of pres- ence in virtual environments

    Mel Slater and Sylvia Wilbur. A framework for immersive virtual environments (five): Speculations on the role of pres- ence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 1997. 1

    1997

  36. [44]

    Bi- lateral propagation network for depth completion

    Jie Tang, Fei-Peng Tian, Boshi An, Jian Li, and Ping Tan. Bi- lateral propagation network for depth completion. In CVPR,

  37. [45]

    3d lidar re- construction with probabilistic depth completion for robotic navigation

    Yifu Tao, Marija Popovi ´c, Yiduo Wang, Sundara Tejaswi Digumarti, Nived Chebrolu, and Maurice Fallon. 3d lidar re- construction with probabilistic depth completion for robotic navigation. In IROS, 2022. 1

    2022

  38. [46]

    Diode: A dense indoor and outdoor depth dataset

    Igor Vasiljevic, Nick Kolkin, Shanyi Zhang, Ruotian Luo, Haochen Wang, Falcon Z Dai, Andrea F Daniele, Mo- hammadreza Mostajabi, Steven Basart, Matthew R Walter, et al. Diode: A dense indoor and outdoor depth dataset. arXiv:1908.00463, 2019. 5

    1908 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Marigold-dc: Zero-shot monocular depth completion with guided diffusion

    Massimiliano Viola, Kevin Qu, Nando Metzger, Bingxin Ke, Alexander Becker, Konrad Schindler, and Anton Obukhov. Marigold-dc: Zero-shot monocular depth completion with guided diffusion. arXiv:2412.13389, 2024. 2, 3, 5, 6

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Irs: A large naturalis- tic indoor robotics stereo dataset to train deep models for disparity and surface normal estimation

    Qiang Wang, Shizhen Zheng, Qingsong Yan, Fei Deng, Kaiyong Zhao, and Xiaowen Chu. Irs: A large naturalis- tic indoor robotics stereo dataset to train deep models for disparity and surface normal estimation. In ICME, 2021. 2 10

    2021

  41. [49]

    Dust3r: Geometric 3d vi- sion made easy

    Shuzhe Wang, Vincent Leroy, Yohann Cabon, Boris Chidlovskii, and Jerome Revaud. Dust3r: Geometric 3d vi- sion made easy. In CVPR, 2024. 1

    2024

  42. [50]

    Tartanair: A dataset to push the limits of visual slam

    Wenshan Wang, Delong Zhu, Xiangwei Wang, Yaoyu Hu, Yuheng Qiu, Chen Wang, Yafei Hu, Ashish Kapoor, and Se- bastian Scherer. Tartanair: A dataset to push the limits of visual slam. In IROS, 2020. 2

    2020

  43. [51]

    Pseudo-lidar from visual depth estimation: Bridging the gap in 3d object detection for autonomous driving

    Yan Wang, Wei-Lun Chao, Divyansh Garg, Bharath Hariha- ran, Mark Campbell, and Kilian Q Weinberger. Pseudo-lidar from visual depth estimation: Bridging the gap in 3d object detection for autonomous driving. In CVPR, 2019. 1

    2019

  44. [52]

    Fastdepth: Fast monocular depth estima- tion on embedded systems

    Diana Wofk, Fangchang Ma, Tien-Ju Yang, Sertac Karaman, and Vivienne Sze. Fastdepth: Fast monocular depth estima- tion on embedded systems. In ICRA, 2019. 1

    2019

  45. [53]

    Multi-scale progressive fusion learning for depth map super-resolution

    Chuhua Xian, Kun Qian, Zitian Zhang, and Charlie CL Wang. Multi-scale progressive fusion learning for depth map super-resolution. arXiv:2011.11865, 2020. 3

    2011 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Diffusion models trained with large data are transferable vi- sual models

    Guangkai Xu, Yongtao Ge, Mingyu Liu, Chengxiang Fan, Kangyang Xie, Zhiyue Zhao, Hao Chen, and Chunhua Shen. Diffusion models trained with large data are transferable vi- sual models. In ICLR, 2025. 2

    2025

  47. [55]

    Depth anything: Unleashing the power of large-scale unlabeled data

    Lihe Yang, Bingyi Kang, Zilong Huang, Xiaogang Xu, Jiashi Feng, and Hengshuang Zhao. Depth anything: Unleashing the power of large-scale unlabeled data. In CVPR, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  48. [56]

    Depth any- thing v2

    Lihe Yang, Bingyi Kang, Zilong Huang, Zhen Zhao, Xiao- gang Xu, Jiashi Feng, and Hengshuang Zhao. Depth any- thing v2. In NeurIPS, 2024. 1, 2, 3, 5

    2024

  49. [57]

    Blendedmvs: A large- scale dataset for generalized multi-view stereo networks

    Yao Yao, Zixin Luo, Shiwei Li, Jingyang Zhang, Yufan Ren, Lei Zhou, Tian Fang, and Long Quan. Blendedmvs: A large- scale dataset for generalized multi-view stereo networks. In CVPR, 2020. 2

    2020

  50. [58]

    Metric3d: Towards zero-shot metric 3d prediction from a single image

    Wei Yin, Chi Zhang, Hao Chen, Zhipeng Cai, Gang Yu, Kaixuan Wang, Xiaozhi Chen, and Chunhua Shen. Metric3d: Towards zero-shot metric 3d prediction from a single image. In ICCV, 2023. 1, 2

    2023

  51. [59]

    Wonderworld: Interactive 3d scene generation from a single image

    Hong-Xing Yu, Haoyi Duan, Charles Herrmann, William T Freeman, and Jiajun Wu. Wonderworld: Interactive 3d scene generation from a single image. arXiv:2406.09394, 2024. 1, 3

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models

    Lvmin Zhang, Anyi Rao, and Maneesh Agrawala. Adding conditional control to text-to-image diffusion models. In ICCV, 2023. 1

    2023

  53. [61]

    Completionformer: Depth completion with convolutions and vision transform- ers

    Youmin Zhang, Xianda Guo, Matteo Poggi, Zheng Zhu, Guan Huang, and Stefano Mattoccia. Completionformer: Depth completion with convolutions and vision transform- ers. In CVPR, 2023. 3

    2023

  54. [62]

    Discrete cosine transform network for guided depth map super-resolution

    Zixiang Zhao, Jiangshe Zhang, Shuang Xu, Zudi Lin, and Hanspeter Pfister. Discrete cosine transform network for guided depth map super-resolution. In CVPR, 2022. 3

    2022

  55. [63]

    3d- vla: A 3d vision-language-action generative world model

    Haoyu Zhen, Xiaowen Qiu, Peihao Chen, Jincheng Yang, Xin Yan, Yilun Du, Yining Hong, and Chuang Gan. 3d- vla: A 3d vision-language-action generative world model. In ICML, 2024. 1

    2024

  56. [64]

    Guided depth map super-resolution: A survey

    Zhiwei Zhong, Xianming Liu, Junjun Jiang, Debin Zhao, and Xiangyang Ji. Guided depth map super-resolution: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 2023. 3

    2023

  57. [65]

    Ogni-dc: Robust depth comple- tion with optimization-guided neural iterations

    Yiming Zuo and Jia Deng. Ogni-dc: Robust depth comple- tion with optimization-guided neural iterations. In ECCV,

  58. [66]

    ground truth

    Yiming Zuo, Willow Yang, Zeyu Ma, and Jia Deng. Omni- dc: Highly robust depth completion with multiresolution depth integration. arXiv:2411.19278, 2024. 2, 3, 5, 6 11 S L M S+M L+M S+L k=3 2.00 2.52 2.74 2.10 2.83 3.07 k=5 1.97 2.16 2.73 2.04 2.82 3.09 k=10 2.00 2.31 2.74 2.09...

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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