The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 9:30 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 1 hour.
2017 International Conference on Field Programmable Technology (ICFPT) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/fpt.2017.8280159
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

FPGA-based ORB feature extraction for real-time visual SLAM

Abstract: Simultaneous Localization And Mapping (SLAM) is the problem of constructing or updating a map of an unknown environment while simultaneously keeping track of an agent's location within it. How to enable SLAM robustly and durably on mobile, or even IoT grade devices, is the main challenge faced by the industry today. The main problems we need to address are: 1.) how to accelerate the SLAM pipeline to meet real-time requirements; and 2.) how to reduce SLAM energy consumption to extend battery life. After delving… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 63 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Compared with the ORB extractor implemented on FPGA in [4], the ORB extractor in eSLAM has deployed hardware-friendly optimization, such as RS-BRIEF and workflow rescheduling. Hence, the latency of feature extraction in eSLAM is approximately 39% less than the latency of [4], even if 48% more pixels are processed in eSLAM because of the involved extra two layers in the image pyramid. Table 3: Frame rate and energy efficiency comparison results, where "N-frame" represents the normal frame, and "Kframe" represents the key frame.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Compared with the ORB extractor implemented on FPGA in [4], the ORB extractor in eSLAM has deployed hardware-friendly optimization, such as RS-BRIEF and workflow rescheduling. Hence, the latency of feature extraction in eSLAM is approximately 39% less than the latency of [4], even if 48% more pixels are processed in eSLAM because of the involved extra two layers in the image pyramid. Table 3: Frame rate and energy efficiency comparison results, where "N-frame" represents the normal frame, and "Kframe" represents the key frame.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several prior efforts have been made to accelerate visual SLAM on low-power platforms, but no fully integrated ORB-based visual SLAM is proposed on such platforms so far. Feature matching and ORB extraction is accelerated on FPGA for visual SLAM system, respectively in [2] and [4]. A SIFT-feature based SLAM is implemented on FPGA [6] where only matrix computation is accelerated but the most time-consuming part, feature extraction, is not involved.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A parallel hardware architecture for SIFT was also reported in Reference [34]. Recent and improved FPGA implementations for SURF [35][36][37] and ORB [38,39] were reported. SIFT and SURF implementations were not included in our comparison because they were intensity-based not binary descriptors.…”
Section: Comparison With Other Implementationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The matching quality of the image pairs will directly affect the autonomous navigation and modeling quality of the subsequent mobile platform. To improve the performance of the ORB algorithm, researchers have mainly applied the following approaches: (1) improving the feature point extraction strategy [7], [13]- [19], (2) enhancing the feature descriptor [20]- [22], and (3) upgrading the strategy of matching feature points [23]- [28]. For example, to improve the distribution uniformity of feature points, enhance the matching efficiency, and increase the correct matching rate, the ORB-slam2 [29] initial matching algorithm boosts the feature point matching efficiency; this improvement is achieved by rasterizing the entire image and modifying the minimum Hamming matching distance to 0.7-0.9 times the sub-optimal matching distance; moreover, the histogram statistics are used to describe the sub-rotation main direction angle, and only the top three direction feature points are selected in the statistics to improve the correct matching rate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%