Performance Evaluation of 3D Correspondence Grouping Algorithms
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper presents a thorough evaluation of several widely-used 3D correspondence grouping algorithms, motived by their significance in vision tasks relying on correct feature correspondences. A good correspondence grouping algorithm is desired to retrieve as many as inliers from initial feature matches, giving a rise in both precision and recall. Towards this rule, we deploy the experiments on three benchmarks respectively addressing shape retrieval, 3D object recognition and point cloud registration scenarios. The variety in application context brings a rich category of nuisances including noise, varying point densities, clutter, occlusion and partial overlaps. It also results to different ratios of inliers and correspondence distributions for comprehensive evaluation. Based on the quantitative outcomes, we give a summarization of the merits/demerits of the evaluated algorithms from both performance and efficiency perspectives.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 6 Apr 2018.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2021: 2; 2022: 2.
4 papers.
- 2021PointDSC: Robust Point Cloud Registration using Deep Spatial Consistencycited by 142
- 2021Skeleton Merger: an Unsupervised Aligned Keypoint Detectorcited by 27
- 2022PointCLM: A Contrastive Learning-based Framework for Multi-instance Point Cloud Registrationcited by 6
- 2022Stress-Testing Point Cloud Registration on Automotive LiDARcited by 0
- 2022PointCLM: A Contrastive Learning-based Framework for Multi-instance Point Cloud Registration1 Sep 2022
- 2022Stress-Testing Point Cloud Registration on Automotive LiDAR16 Apr 2022
- 2021Skeleton Merger: an Unsupervised Aligned Keypoint Detector19 Mar 2021
- 2021PointDSC: Robust Point Cloud Registration using Deep Spatial Consistency9 Mar 2021