2020
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2009.01579
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DESC: Domain Adaptation for Depth Estimation via Semantic Consistency

Abstract: Accurate real depth annotations are difficult to acquire, needing the use of special devices such as a LiDAR sensor. Self-supervised methods try to overcome this problem by processing video or stereo sequences, which may not always be available. Instead, in this paper, we propose a domain adaptation approach to train a monocular depth estimation model using a fully-annotated source dataset and a non-annotated target dataset. We bridge the domain gap by leveraging semantic predictions and low-level edge feature… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 47 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In [32,54,59] source domain data is replaced with a model pre-trained on the source. [36] uses low-level edge features to enforce consistency in UDA for monocular depth estimation. In Fewshot UDA (FUDA) [26,60], only a few examples per class are labeled in the source domain, while the rest are unlabeled.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [32,54,59] source domain data is replaced with a model pre-trained on the source. [36] uses low-level edge features to enforce consistency in UDA for monocular depth estimation. In Fewshot UDA (FUDA) [26,60], only a few examples per class are labeled in the source domain, while the rest are unlabeled.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first category mainly covers the conventional methods including discrepancy measures such as MMD [50,22] and CMD [99], geodesic flow kernel [28], sub-space alignment [19], asymmetric metric learning [41], etc. The general idea of the second category is to align source and target domains at different representation levels, including: (1) input image-level alignment [5,36] using imageto-image translation methods such as CycleGAN [109], or statistics matching [1]; (2) internal feature-level alignment based on feature-level domain adversarial learning [83,51,105]; and (3) output-space alignment [81,85,52] typically by an adversarial module. For the third category, self-supervised learning based domain adaptation methods [23] achieve great progress, in which simple auxiliary tasks generated automatically from unlabeled data are utilized to train feature representations, such as rotation prediction [24], flip prediction [90], patch location prediction [90], etc.…”
Section: Domain Adaptationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, much less attention has been paid to domain adaptation for low-level tasks. There are several works investigating the domainadaptive depth estimation task, including geometry-aware alignment [105], semantic-level consistency [52] and imagelevel translation [106,2].…”
Section: Domain Adaptationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unsupervised domain adaptation attempts to overcome these limitations. However, the vast majority of proposed approaches focus on sim-to-real domain adaptation mostly in an offline manner [12,23], i.e., a directed knowledge transfer without the need to avoid catastrophic forgetting and with access to Fig. 1.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%