Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 41 references

UniCT Depth: Event-Image Fusion Based Monocular Depth Estimation with Convolution-Compensated ViT Dual SA Block

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read UniCT Depth claims that fusing event streams and intensity images through a dual-branch self-attention encoder yields the lowest average depth error yet reported on the MVSEC and DENSE benchmarks.

desk verdict Incremental but plausible fusion architecture; the SOTA claim rests on baseline tables with at least one internal inconsistency, so the verdict hinges on protocol transparency. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.19948 v1 pith:JU7BFZ7Q submitted 2025-07-26 cs.CV

Luoxi Jing , Dianxi Shi , Zhe Liu , Songchang Jin , Chunping Qiu , Ziteng Qiao , Yuxian Li , Jianqiang Xia This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords monoculardepthestimationeventcameraimage-eventfusionvisiontransformerdualself-attentiondetailcompensationconvolutionMVSECdatasetDENSE
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 claims that monocular depth estimation in difficult conditions improves when event-camera streams and ordinary intensity images are fused inside a single CNN-Transformer encoder that models both spatial context and cross-modal channel dependencies. It presents UniCT Depth, whose core CcViT-DA blocks use two parallel attention branches — a windowed spatial self-attention (CMSA) and a channel-grouped modal-fusion self-attention (MFSA) — plus a Detail Compensation Convolution (DCC) block that restores local texture and edges. On the MVSEC and DENSE datasets, the method reports the lowest average absolute depth error among image-based, event-based, and fusion-based baselines, including a 5.56% and 7.16% relative improvement over SRFNet in Abs.Rel for day and night scenes. Ablations show that the dual attention branches together beat pure convolution, standard self-attention, and either branch alone, and that fusing both modalities outperforms using either one alone.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing component is the CcViT-DA Block, a CNN-Transformer module placed in the encoder's four downsampling stages. It contains Context Modeling Self-Attention (CMSA), which runs multi-head self-attention within non-overlapping spatial windows to capture local context for occluded regions, and Modal Fusion Self-Attention (MFSA), which applies single-head self-attention to a transposed token so that attention runs along the channel dimension in groups, modeling global dependencies and cross-modal correlation. The outputs of the two branches are dot-multiplied with the output of the Detail Compensation Convolution (DCC) block, a spatial-attention map built from channel-wise max and average pooling followed by sigmoid and convolutions, then concatenated and merged. These choices cut the attention complexity from $\mathcal{O}(P^2 d)$ to $\mathcal{O}(P P_w d) + \mathcal{O}(P C C_g)$, which is what lets the dual attention run at interactive speeds.

What would settle it

Recompute the MVSEC and DENSE comparisons using the official releases of SRFNet and the 2024 transformer-based fusion method under the same training schedule; if the claimed 5.56% and 7.16% Abs.Rel improvements over SRFNet or the margin over the transformer baseline do not reproduce, the central claim fails. A simpler check is to correct the 'Transform-based[2024]' row in Table 2, whose $\delta<1.25$ values of about 0.35 are far below every other method's roughly 0.6 and whose RMSE log is absent.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper discovers that a unified encoder with two complementary self-attention branches — one computing attention inside spatial windows and one computing attention across channel groups — fuses event and image features more effectively than prior single-branch or concatenation-based fusion, while a convolution-based detail compensation block sharpens the edges and textures that depth maps need in occluded or low-light scenes. The evidence is the set of benchmark numbers: the lowest mean Avg.Error at every cutoff distance on both MVSEC and DENSE, the best score in 10 of 12 metrics in Table 2, and the ablations where the full CcViT-DA block beats every partial configuration. The authors would summarize this as a demonstration that complementary spatial-window and channel-group attention, together with local convolution compensation, is a better way to combine event and image modalities than the alternatives compared.

Load-bearing premise

The reported advantage depends on the baseline numbers in Tables 1-3 being accurate and comparably configured, since the paper provides no code or evaluation protocol and one baseline row in Table 2 shows missing and implausible values.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • On both MVSEC and DENSE, the fused dual-modality model produces lower average depth error at 10m, 20m, and 30m cutoffs than any image-only, event-only, or fusion baseline reported.
  • The 5.56% (day) and 7.16% (night) relative Abs.Rel gains over SRFNet indicate that channel-wise attention adds information that spatial-prior-only fusion misses.
  • The ablation comparing row (8) with (6) and (7) shows the DCC block lowers mean error at all cutoffs, meaning local detail compensation is not redundant with either attention branch.
  • Using both modalities as input beats either modality alone in day and night scenes, confirming the fusion premise the architecture is built on.
  • The full model runs at about 25 FPS on an RTX 3090 while achieving these results, so the accuracy improvement does not sacrifice real-time operation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the dual attention block is defined on generic feature maps rather than on any event-specific representation, the same encoder design could be dropped into other cross-modal dense prediction tasks (for example, depth from image plus LiDAR, or low-light semantic segmentation); the paper does not test this.
  • The windowed and channel-grouped attention reduces the cost of global self-attention, so the architecture should scale more gracefully to higher input resolutions than a standard transformer fusion encoder; this could be checked by evaluating at 512x512 or 1024x1024.
  • The implausibly low $\delta<1.25$ values and the missing RMSE log for the 'Transform-based[2024]' row in Table 2 suggest the comparison against that baseline should be re-audited with official code before the claimed margin is taken at face value.
  • The single-modality ablations in Table 5 hint that the network could operate in a graceful-degradation mode if one modality is missing at test time, but the paper does not evaluate that scenario.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes UniCT Depth, a monocular depth estimation method that fuses event camera data with intensity images. The architecture is a U-Net-style encoder-decoder whose encoder uses CcViT-DA blocks, each containing a ViT Dual Self-Attention module (with a spatial-window CMSA branch and a channel-wise MFSA branch) plus a Detail Compensation Convolution (DCC) block. The method is evaluated on the MVSEC and simulated DENSE datasets against image-based, event-based, and fusion-based baselines using standard depth metrics. The authors report state-of-the-art or competitive results, particularly lower Average Error across cut-off distances, and provide ablations of the attention branches, the DCC block, and the input modalities.

Significance. If the reported results are reproducible and the baseline comparisons are fair, the paper makes a useful architectural contribution to event-image fusion for monocular depth estimation. The combination of windowed spatial attention, channel-wise cross-modal attention, and a convolutional detail-compensation path is plausible and well motivated. The ablation study (Table 4) and modality study (Table 5) give some support for the design choices, and the reported inference speed (25 FPS on an RTX 3090) indicates practical potential. However, the significance is conditional on verification: no code, no evaluation protocol details beyond basic training settings, no error bars or multi-seed runs, and at least one internally inconsistent baseline row (Table 2) currently undermine the claim that the method 'outperforms existing methods' on MVSEC and DENSE.

major comments (4)
  1. [Table 2] The Transform-based[2024] row in Table 2 is internally inconsistent: RMSE log is missing for both scenes, and the δ<1.25, δ<1.25², and δ<1.25³ values (0.351/0.437/0.480 on Outdoor day1) are far lower than every other method in the same table, including methods with worse Abs.Rel. This is not explained anywhere in the text. Because the headline claim of 'best in 10 out of 12 scores' depends on the correctness of all baseline rows, the authors must either correct this row, explain the evaluation protocol that produced it, or remove it and re-evaluate the comparison, ideally with code or a detailed protocol that makes the numbers reproducible.
  2. [Section 4.1 / Tables 1-3] The experimental setup is under-specified. Section 4.1 states learning rate, optimizer, epochs, image size, and loss weights, but it does not specify the train/test sequence split for MVSEC, the number of runs or seeds, the baselines' training or evaluation settings (e.g., whether each baseline was re-trained under the same protocol or numbers are taken from prior papers), or the exact procedure for computing Avg.Error at cutoff distances. Tables 1-3 report single runs with no error bars. Consequently, the claimed margins, including the 5.56% and 7.16% Abs.Rel improvements over SRFNet in Section 4.2, cannot be independently verified or meaningfully compared. Please provide complete reproducibility details, including code, or report the results as preliminary.
  3. [Table 3] The SRFNet row on the DENSE dataset is difficult to reconcile with the method's strong performance on MVSEC. For example, SRFNet's Avg.Error at 30m is 6.11 and Abs.Rel is 0.51, while the same method is second-best on MVSEC in Table 2 (Abs.Rel 0.234/0.335). Unless the DENSE evaluation used a different protocol (e.g., different training set, input resolution, or ground-truth preprocessing), these values appear implausibly poor. The authors should describe how each baseline was evaluated on DENSE and explain or correct these numbers; otherwise the '13.3% / 30% / 10.9%' improvement claims in Section 4.2 are not trustworthy.
  4. [Section 3.2 / Figure 2(d)] The Detail Compensation Conv (DCC) block is not fully specified. The text says the block uses global max/average pooling, concatenation, a convolution to produce a single channel, a sigmoid, a dot product, and then 'two convolutional layers and activation functions', but it does not give kernel sizes, number of channels, layer counts, or the roles of the intermediate 'weighted output' with shape H×W×1. Without these details, the block cannot be reproduced from the paper. Please provide the full layer-by-layer specification, either in the main text, an appendix, or accompanying code.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.2 / Table 2] The text says 'best results in 10 out of 12 scores', but Table 2 has 10 score columns (five metrics for two scenes); the count should be clarified or the statement corrected.
  2. [Figure 2] The notation list in Figure 2 includes P_w, N_w, N_h, C_h, and C_g but some of these are not defined in the body text; please define all symbols in the text or caption for clarity.
  3. [Section 3.2] The abbreviation for the proposed block is inconsistently capitalized: 'CcViT-DA' in the title/abstract and 'CCViT-DA' in Section 3.2; please standardize.
  4. [Abstract / Section 5] Minor language issues: 'enhances edge representations' in the abstract should be 'enhance', and Section 3.2 contains 'It relies on standard self-attention... which is susceptibility to gradient' — these need copy-editing.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the paper's claims are empirical and benchmarked against external datasets and baselines.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is empirical: UniCT Depth outperforms image-, event-, and fusion-based monocular depth estimators on MVSEC and DENSE. The supporting evidence is a set of external benchmark comparisons (Tables 1-3) using standard metrics (Avg. Error, Abs. Rel, RMSE log, delta accuracy). No equation in the paper derives a prediction from the method's own outputs, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The architectural components (CMSA, MFSA, DCC) are defined independently of the reported results; ablations in Table 4 compare variants of the proposed block on held-out sequences, which is a normal experimental procedure rather than a circular reduction. The cited DaViT blocks are prior work by other authors, and the self-citations (e.g., Shi et al. 2023a on event-based depth, Cui et al. 2023 on complexity comparisons) are contextual and not load-bearing for the main claim. Concerns that baseline numbers may be misreported or that no code/protocol is provided are evidentiary and reproducibility issues, not circularity. Therefore the derivation chain is self-contained with respect to the empirical claim, and the circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical or conceptual entities are introduced; CcViT-DA and DCC are composing existing network components. The central claim rests only on empirical validation with hand-chosen hyperparameters and standard domain assumptions.

free parameters (6)
  • Number of voxel time bins B = 5
    Set by hand in Section 4.1 as a balance between temporal resolution and cost.
  • Learning rate = 0.0002 (MVSEC), 0.002 (DENSE)
    Hand-chosen in Section 4.1.
  • L1 and L2 loss weights = 1 and 1
    Set to equal weights in Section 4.1.
  • Input image size = 224x224
    Fixed input resolution in Section 4.1.
  • Batch size = 16
    Hand-chosen in Section 4.1.
  • Training epochs = 50
    Fixed in Section 4.1 with LR decay at epochs 10/20/30.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption MVSEC and DENSE ground truth depth maps are accurate enough for supervised training and evaluation.
    No error analysis of ground truth is provided; all losses and metrics rely on these labels.
  • domain assumption The event voxel grid representation of Eq. (1) preserves sufficient information for depth estimation.
    The method inherits a standard event representation without comparing alternatives in the ablation.
  • domain assumption CMSA and MFSA blocks from DaViT [Ding et al., 2022] remain effective when applied to concatenated event-image tokens.
    These blocks are used as black boxes; the paper does not analyze whether the dual attention is optimal for this modality pair.
  • domain assumption The L1+L2 loss in Section 3.3 is an appropriate objective for monocular depth.
    No loss function ablation is performed, and only one training objective is tested.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of UniCT Depth: Event-Image Fusion Based Monocular Depth Estimation with Convolution-Compensated ViT Dual SA Block." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JU7BFZ7Q

@misc{pith2026250719948,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: UniCT Depth: Event-Image Fusion Based Monocular Depth Estimation with Convolution-Compensated ViT Dual SA Block},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JU7BFZ7Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.19948}
}
read the original abstract

Depth estimation plays a crucial role in 3D scene understanding and is extensively used in a wide range of vision tasks. Image-based methods struggle in challenging scenarios, while event cameras offer high dynamic range and temporal resolution but face difficulties with sparse data. Combining event and image data provides significant advantages, yet effective integration remains challenging. Existing CNN-based fusion methods struggle with occlusions and depth disparities due to limited receptive fields, while Transformer-based fusion methods often lack deep modality interaction. To address these issues, we propose UniCT Depth, an event-image fusion method that unifies CNNs and Transformers to model local and global features. We propose the Convolution-compensated ViT Dual SA (CcViT-DA) Block, designed for the encoder, which integrates Context Modeling Self-Attention (CMSA) to capture spatial dependencies and Modal Fusion Self-Attention (MFSA) for effective cross-modal fusion. Furthermore, we design the tailored Detail Compensation Convolution (DCC) Block to improve texture details and enhances edge representations. Experiments show that UniCT Depth outperforms existing image, event, and fusion-based monocular depth estimation methods across key metrics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.19948 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Effects of our methods. Blue boxes highlight objects that [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of our proposed UniCT Depth. It processes a time-synchronized pair of event frames and intensity image frames to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Qualitative comparison for the MVSEC dataset. Compared with baseline methods, our method effectively merges image and event [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative comparison for DENSE. Our proposed method provides a more complete and accurate depth estimation of objects, such [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A 240 180 130 db 3 s latency global shutter spatiotemporal vision sensor

    Christian Brandli, Raphael Berner, Minhao Yang, Shih-Chii Liu, and Tobi Delbruck. A 240 180 130 db 3 s latency global shutter spatiotemporal vision sensor. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits , 49(10):2333--2341, 2014

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Single-image depth perception in the wild

    Weifeng Chen, Zhao Fu, Dawei Yang, and Jia Deng. Single-image depth perception in the wild. Advances in neural information processing systems , 29, 2016

    work page 2016

  3. [3]

    Strip attention for image restoration

    Yuning Cui, Yi Tao, Luoxi Jing, and Alois Knoll. Strip attention for image restoration. In International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI , 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Multi-modal fusion of event and rgb for monocular depth estimation using a unified transformer-based architecture

    Anusha Devulapally, Md Fahim Faysal Khan, Siddharth Advani, and Vijaykrishnan Narayanan. Multi-modal fusion of event and rgb for monocular depth estimation using a unified transformer-based architecture. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 2081--2089, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Davit: Dual attention vision transformers

    Mingyu Ding, Bin Xiao, Noel Codella, Ping Luo, Jingdong Wang, and Lu Yuan. Davit: Dual attention vision transformers. In European conference on computer vision , pages 74--92. Springer, 2022

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale

    Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weissenborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Sylvain Gelly, et al. An image is worth 16x16 words: Transformers for image recognition at scale. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2020

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Predicting depth, surface normals and semantic labels with a common multi-scale convolutional architecture

    David Eigen and Rob Fergus. Predicting depth, surface normals and semantic labels with a common multi-scale convolutional architecture. In Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision , pages 2650--2658, 2015

    work page 2015

  8. [8]

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

    David Eigen, Christian Puhrsch, and Rob Fergus. Depth map prediction from a single image using a multi-scale deep network. Advances in neural information processing systems , 27, 2014

    work page 2014

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    A unifying contrast maximization framework for event cameras, with applications to motion, depth, and optical flow estimation

    Guillermo Gallego, Henri Rebecq, and Davide Scaramuzza. A unifying contrast maximization framework for event cameras, with applications to motion, depth, and optical flow estimation. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 3867-...

    2018

  2. [10]

    Combining events and frames using recurrent asynchronous multimodal networks for monocular depth prediction

    Daniel Gehrig, Michelle R \"u egg, Mathias Gehrig, Javier Hidalgo-Carri \'o , and Davide Scaramuzza. Combining events and frames using recurrent asynchronous multimodal networks for monocular depth prediction. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 6(2):2822--2829, 2021

    2021

  3. [11]

    Unsupervised monocular depth estimation with left-right consistency

    Cl \'e ment Godard, Oisin Mac Aodha, and Gabriel J Brostow. Unsupervised monocular depth estimation with left-right consistency. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 270--279, 2017

    2017

  4. [12]

    Monocular depth estimation through virtual-world supervision and real-world sfm self-supervision

    Akhil Gurram, Ahmet Faruk Tuna, Fengyi Shen, Onay Urfalioglu, and Antonio M L \'o pez. Monocular depth estimation through virtual-world supervision and real-world sfm self-supervision. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 23(8):12738--12751, 2021

    2021

  5. [13]

    Hierarchical neural memory network for low latency event processing

    Ryuhei Hamaguchi, Yasutaka Furukawa, Masaki Onishi, and Ken Sakurada. Hierarchical neural memory network for low latency event processing. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 22867--22876, 2023

    2023

  6. [14]

    Learning monocular dense depth from events

    Javier Hidalgo-Carri \'o , Daniel Gehrig, and Davide Scaramuzza. Learning monocular dense depth from events. In 2020 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV) , pages 534--542. IEEE, 2020

    2020

  7. [15]

    Look deeper into depth: Monocular depth estimation with semantic booster and attention-driven loss

    Jianbo Jiao, Ying Cao, Yibing Song, and Rynson Lau. Look deeper into depth: Monocular depth estimation with semantic booster and attention-driven loss. In Proceedings of the European conference on computer vision (ECCV) , pages 53--69, 2018

    2018

  8. [16]

    Real-time 3d reconstruction and 6-dof tracking with an event camera

    Hanme Kim, Stefan Leutenegger, and Andrew J Davison. Real-time 3d reconstruction and 6-dof tracking with an event camera. In Computer Vision--ECCV 2016: 14th European Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 11-14, 2016, Proceedings, Part VI 14 , pages 349--364. Springer, 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    Multi-loss rebalancing algorithm for monocular depth estimation

    Jae-Han Lee and Chang-Su Kim. Multi-loss rebalancing algorithm for monocular depth estimation. In Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XVII 16 , pages 785--801. Springer, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    Megadepth: Learning single-view depth prediction from internet photos

    Zhengqi Li and Noah Snavely. Megadepth: Learning single-view depth prediction from internet photos. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 2041--2050, 2018

    2018

  11. [19]

    Srfnet: Monocular depth estimation with fine-grained structure via spatial reliability-oriented fusion of frames and events

    Tianbo Pan, Zidong Cao, and Lin Wang. Srfnet: Monocular depth estimation with fine-grained structure via spatial reliability-oriented fusion of frames and events. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 10695--10702. IEEE, 2024

    2024

  12. [20]

    Vision transformers for dense prediction

    Ren \'e Ranftl, Alexey Bochkovskiy, and Vladlen Koltun. Vision transformers for dense prediction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision , pages 12179--12188, 2021

    2021

  13. [21]

    Emvs: Event-based multi-view stereo—3d reconstruction with an event camera in real-time

    Henri Rebecq, Guillermo Gallego, Elias Mueggler, and Davide Scaramuzza. Emvs: Event-based multi-view stereo—3d reconstruction with an event camera in real-time. International Journal of Computer Vision , 126(12):1394--1414, 2018

    2018

  14. [22]

    U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention--MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, proceedings, part...

    2015

  15. [23]

    Event transformer

    Alberto Sabater, Luis Montesano, and Ana C Murillo. Event transformer. a sparse-aware solution for efficient event data processing. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 2677--2686, 2022

    2022

  16. [24]

    Event transformer+

    Alberto Sabater, Luis Montesano, and Ana C Murillo. Event transformer+. a multi-purpose solution for efficient event data processing. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 2023

    2023

  17. [25]

    Iebins: Iterative elastic bins for monocular depth estimation

    Shuwei Shao, Zhongcai Pei, Xingming Wu, Zhong Liu, Weihai Chen, and Zhengguo Li. Iebins: Iterative elastic bins for monocular depth estimation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 36, 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    Improved event-based dense depth estimation via optical flow compensation

    Dianxi Shi, Luoxi Jing, Ruihao Li, Zhe Liu, Lin Wang, Huachi Xu, and Yi Zhang. Improved event-based dense depth estimation via optical flow compensation. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 4902--4908. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Even: An event-based framework for monocular depth estimation at adverse night conditions

    Peilun Shi, Jiachuan Peng, Jianing Qiu, Xinwei Ju, Frank Po Wen Lo, and Benny Lo. Even: An event-based framework for monocular depth estimation at adverse night conditions. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO) , pages 1--7. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Generating text with recurrent neural networks

    Ilya Sutskever, James Martens, and Geoffrey E Hinton. Generating text with recurrent neural networks. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on machine learning (ICML-11) , pages 1017--1024, 2011

    2011

  21. [29]

    Perception and navigation in autonomous systems in the era of learning: A survey

    Yang Tang, Chaoqiang Zhao, Jianrui Wang, Chongzhen Zhang, Qiyu Sun, Wei Xing Zheng, Wenli Du, Feng Qian, and J \"u rgen Kurths. Perception and navigation in autonomous systems in the era of learning: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , 2022

    2022

  22. [30]

    Learning an event sequence embedding for dense event-based deep stereo

    Stepan Tulyakov, Francois Fleuret, Martin Kiefel, Peter Gehler, and Michael Hirsch. Learning an event sequence embedding for dense event-based deep stereo. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 1527--1537, 2019

    2019

  23. [31]

    Sdc-depth: Semantic divide-and-conquer network for monocular depth estimation

    Lijun Wang, Jianming Zhang, Oliver Wang, Zhe Lin, and Huchuan Lu. Sdc-depth: Semantic divide-and-conquer network for monocular depth estimation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 541--550, 2020

    2020

  24. [32]

    Cliffnet for monocular depth estimation with hierarchical embedding loss

    Lijun Wang, Jianming Zhang, Yifan Wang, Huchuan Lu, and Xiang Ruan. Cliffnet for monocular depth estimation with hierarchical embedding loss. In European Conference on Computer Vision , pages 316--331. Springer, 2020

    2020

  25. [33]

    Dual transfer learning for event-based end-task prediction via pluggable event to image translation

    Lin Wang, Yujeong Chae, and Kuk-Jin Yoon. Dual transfer learning for event-based end-task prediction via pluggable event to image translation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 2135--2145, 2021

    2021

  26. [34]

    Graphcl: Graph-based clustering for semi-supervised medical image segmentation

    Mengzhu Wang, Jiao Li, Houcheng Su, Nan Yin, Liang Yang, and Shen Li. Graphcl: Graph-based clustering for semi-supervised medical image segmentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.13147 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Smooth-guided implicit data augmentation for domain generalization

    Mengzhu Wang, Junze Liu, Ge Luo, Shanshan Wang, Wei Wang, Long Lan, Ye Wang, and Feiping Nie. Smooth-guided implicit data augmentation for domain generalization. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems , 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    Student becoming the master: Knowledge amalgamation for joint scene parsing, depth estimation, and more

    Jingwen Ye, Yixin Ji, Xinchao Wang, Kairi Ou, Dapeng Tao, and Mingli Song. Student becoming the master: Knowledge amalgamation for joint scene parsing, depth estimation, and more. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 2829...

    2019

  29. [37]

    Monovit: Self-supervised monocular depth estimation with a vision transformer

    Chaoqiang Zhao, Youmin Zhang, Matteo Poggi, Fabio Tosi, Xianda Guo, Zheng Zhu, Guan Huang, Yang Tang, and Stefano Mattoccia. Monovit: Self-supervised monocular depth estimation with a vision transformer. In 2022 international conference on 3D vision (3DV) , pages 668--678. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  30. [38]

    The multivehicle stereo event camera dataset: An event camera dataset for 3d perception

    Alex Zihao Zhu, Dinesh Thakur, Tolga \"O zaslan, Bernd Pfrommer, Vijay Kumar, and Kostas Daniilidis. The multivehicle stereo event camera dataset: An event camera dataset for 3d perception. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 3(3):2032--2039, 2018

    2018

  31. [39]

    Unsupervised event-based learning of optical flow, depth, and egomotion

    Alex Zihao Zhu, Liangzhe Yuan, Kenneth Chaney, and Kostas Daniilidis. Unsupervised event-based learning of optical flow, depth, and egomotion. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 989--997, 2019

    2019

  32. [40]

    Self-supervised event-based monocular depth estimation using cross-modal consistency

    Junyu Zhu, Lina Liu, Bofeng Jiang, Feng Wen, Hongbo Zhang, Wanlong Li, and Yong Liu. Self-supervised event-based monocular depth estimation using cross-modal consistency. In 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pages 7704--7710. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  33. [41]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION fin.entry add.period write newline FUNCTION new.block output.state before.all = 'skip after.block 'output.state := if FUNCTION new.sentence output.state after.block = 'skip output.state before.all = 'skip after.sentence '...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.