mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

RobustSpring: Benchmarking Robustness to Image Corruptions for Optical Flow, Scene Flow and Stereo

arXiv 2505.09368 ↗First posted 14 May 2025cs.CV cs.LGcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Standard benchmarks for optical flow, scene flow, and stereo vision algorithms generally focus on model accuracy rather than robustness to image corruptions like noise or rain. Hence, the resilience of models to such real-world perturbations is largely unquantified. To address this, we present RobustSpring, a comprehensive dataset and benchmark for evaluating robustness to image corruptions for optical flow, scene flow, and stereo models. RobustSpring applies 20 different image corruptions, including noise, blur, color changes, quality degradations, and weather distortions, in a time-, stereo-, and depth-consistent manner to the high-resolution Spring dataset, creating a suite of 20,000 corrupted images that reflect challenging conditions. RobustSpring enables comparisons of model robustness via a new corruption robustness metric. Integration with the Spring benchmark enables two-axis evaluations of both accuracy and robustness. We benchmark a curated selection of initial models, observing that robustness varies widely by corruption type, and experimentally show that evaluations on RobustSpring indicate real-world robustness. RobustSpring is a new computer vision benchmark to treat robustness as a first-class citizen, fostering models that are accurate and resilient. It is available at https://spring-benchmark.org.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 59 of its 91 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 May 2025.

Builds on

59 of 91 references.

References · 59

  1. 2019Benchmarking Neural Network Robustness to Common Corruptions and Perturbationscited by 2,877
  2. 2020RAFT: Recurrent All-Pairs Field Transforms for Optical Flowcited by 2,415
  3. 2015FlowNet: Learning Optical Flow with Convolutional Networkscited by 1,059
  4. 2017PWC-Net: CNNs for Optical Flow Using Pyramid, Warping, and Cost Volumecited by 968
  5. 2015A Large Dataset to Train Convolutional Networks for Disparity, Optical Flow, and Scene Flow Estimationcited by 881
  6. 2018Robustness May Be at Odds with Accuracycited by 880
  7. 2016FlowNet 2.0: Evolution of Optical Flow Estimation with Deep Networkscited by 784
  8. 2020RobustBench: a standardized adversarial robustness benchmarkcited by 661
  9. 2020Measuring Robustness to Natural Distribution Shifts in Image Classificationcited by 454
  10. 2016Optical Flow Estimation using a Spatial Pyramid Networkcited by 424
  11. 2021RAFT-Stereo: Multilevel Recurrent Field Transforms for Stereo Matchingcited by 353
  12. 2016Virtual Worlds as Proxy for Multi-Object Tracking Analysiscited by 341
38 more
  1. 2019Benchmarking Robustness in Object Detection: Autonomous Driving when Winter is Comingcited by 336
  2. 2021GMFlow: Learning Optical Flow via Global Matchingcited by 327
  3. 2022FlowFormer: A Transformer Architecture for Optical Flowcited by 275
  4. 2019GA-Net: Guided Aggregation Net for End-to-end Stereo Matchingcited by 244
  5. 2021Learning to Estimate Hidden Motions with Global Motion Aggregationcited by 224
  6. 2017Formal Guarantees on the Robustness of a Classifier against Adversarial Manipulationcited by 185
  7. 2024SEA-RAFT: Simple, Efficient, Accurate RAFT for Optical Flowcited by 174
  8. 2023Spring: A High-Resolution High-Detail Dataset and Benchmark for Scene Flow, Optical Flow and Stereocited by 172
  9. 2017Playing for Benchmarkscited by 169
  10. 2020Hierarchical Neural Architecture Search for Deep Stereo Matchingcited by 166
  11. 2022Attention Concatenation Volume for Accurate and Efficient Stereo Matchingcited by 130
  12. 2023Robo3D: Towards Robust and Reliable 3D Perception against Corruptionscited by 129
  13. 2020RAFT-3D: Scene Flow using Rigid-Motion Embeddingscited by 122
  14. 20223D Common Corruptions and Data Augmentationcited by 119
  15. 2021AutoFlow: Learning a Better Training Set for Optical Flowcited by 102
  16. 2020Training robust neural networks using Lipschitz boundscited by 99
  17. 2021RobustART: Benchmarking Robustness on Architecture Design and Training Techniquescited by 79
  18. 2019Physics-Based Rendering for Improving Robustness to Raincited by 49
  19. 2019Attacking Optical Flowcited by 41
  20. 2024SeFlow: A Self-Supervised Scene Flow Method in Autonomous Drivingcited by 39
  21. 2023CosPGD: an efficient white-box adversarial attack for pixel-wise prediction taskscited by 27
  22. 2019Learning Multi-Human Optical Flowcited by 26
  23. 2020Stereopagnosia: Fooling Stereo Networks with Adversarial Perturbationscited by 19
  24. 2021Stereoscopic Universal Perturbations across Different Architectures and Datasetscited by 17
  25. 2022A Perturbation-Constrained Adversarial Attack for Evaluating the Robustness of Optical Flowcited by 16
  26. 2021Towards Understanding Adversarial Robustness of Optical Flow Networkscited by 15
  27. 2023Distracting Downpour: Adversarial Weather Attacks for Motion Estimationcited by 15
  28. 2023Neural Architecture Design and Robustness: A Datasetcited by 15
  29. 2022M-FUSE: Multi-frame Fusion for Scene Flow Estimationcited by 14
  30. 2023Classification robustness to common optical aberrationscited by 13
  31. 2024BlinkVision: A Benchmark for Optical Flow, Scene Flow and Point Tracking Estimation using RGB Frames and Eventscited by 13
  32. 2022High Resolution Multi-Scale RAFT (Robust Vision Challenge 2022)cited by 12
  33. 2016Efficient Optical flow and Stereo Vision for Velocity Estimation and Obstacle Avoidance on an Autonomous Pocket Dronecited by 11
  34. 2023On the unreasonable vulnerability of transformers for image restoration -- and an easy fixcited by 11
  35. 2022Multi-Scale RAFT: Combining Hierarchical Concepts for Learning-based Optical FLow Estimationcited by 9
  36. 2022Attacking Motion Estimation with Adversarial Snowcited by 9
  37. 2023Improving Feature Stability during Upsampling -- Spectral Artifacts and the Importance of Spatial Contextcited by 8
  38. 2018The Schulze Method of Votingcited by 7

50 most cited of 59 All 59 (JSON)

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 5.

7 papers.