To Glue or Not to Glue? Classical vs Learned Image Matching for Mobile Mapping Cameras to Textured Semantic 3D Building Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Feature matching is a necessary step for many computer vision and photogrammetry applications such as image registration, structure-from-motion, and visual localization. Classical handcrafted methods such as SIFT feature detection and description combined with nearest neighbour matching and RANSAC outlier removal have been state-of-the-art for mobile mapping cameras. With recent advances in deep learning, learnable methods have been introduced and proven to have better robustness and performance under complex conditions. Despite their growing adoption, a comprehensive comparison between classical and learnable feature matching methods for the specific task of semantic 3D building camera-to-model matching is still missing. This submission systematically evaluates the effectiveness of different feature-matching techniques in visual localization using textured CityGML LoD2 models. We use standard benchmark datasets (HPatches, MegaDepth-1500) and custom datasets consisting of facade textures and corresponding camera images (terrestrial and drone). For the latter, we evaluate the achievable accuracy of the absolute pose estimated using a Perspective-n-Point (PnP) algorithm, with geometric ground truth derived from geo-referenced trajectory data. The results indicate that the learnable feature matching methods vastly outperform traditional approaches regarding accuracy and robustness on our challenging custom datasets with zero to 12 RANSAC-inliers and zero to 0.16 area under the curve. We believe that this work will foster the development of model-based visual localization methods. Link to the code: https://github.com/simBauer/ToGlueornottoGlue
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 25 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 May 2025.
Builds on
13 of 25 references.
References · 13
- 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,608
- 2019SuperGlue: Learning Feature Matching with Graph Neural Networkscited by 1,443
- 2017SuperPoint: Self-Supervised Interest Point Detection and Descriptioncited by 1,320
- 2021LoFTR: Detector-Free Local Feature Matching with Transformerscited by 984
- 2024Grounding Image Matching in 3D with MASt3Rcited by 983
- 2018MegaDepth: Learning Single-View Depth Prediction from Internet Photoscited by 737
- 2020DISK: Learning local features with policy gradientcited by 312
- 2017HPatches: A benchmark and evaluation of handcrafted and learned local descriptorscited by 264
- 2019Kornia: an Open Source Differentiable Computer Vision Library for PyTorchcited by 232
- 2023GlueStick: Robust Image Matching by Sticking Points and Lines Togethercited by 66
- 2024Local Feature Matching Using Deep Learning: A Surveycited by 26
- 2023Visual Localization using Imperfect 3D Models from the Internetcited by 20
1 more
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.