Skip to main content

Is Multi-model Feature Matching Better for Endoscopic Motion Estimation?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computer-Assisted and Robotic Endoscopy (CARE 2014)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNIP,volume 8899))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 865 Accesses

Abstract

Camera motion estimation is a standard yet critical step to endoscopic visualization. It is affected by the variation of locations and correspondences of features detected in 2D images. Feature detectors and descriptors vary, though one of the most widely used remains SIFT. Practitioners usually also adopt its feature matching strategy, which defines inliers as the feature pairs subjecting to a global affine transformation. However, for endoscopic videos, we are curious if it is more suitable to cluster features into multiple groups. We can still enforce the same transformation as in SIFT within each group. Such a multi-model idea has been recently examined in the Multi-Affine work, which outperforms Lowe’s SIFT in terms of re-projection error on minimally invasive endoscopic images with manually labelled ground-truth matches of SIFT features. Since their difference lies in matching, the accuracy gain of estimated motion is attributed to the holistic Multi-Affine feature matching algorithm. But, more concretely, the matching criterion and point searching can be the same as those built in SIFT. We argue that the real variation is only the motion model verification. We either enforce a single global motion model or employ a group of multiple local ones. In this paper, we investigate how sensitive the estimated motion is affected by the number of motion models assumed in feature matching. While the sensitivity can be analytically evaluated, we present an empirical analysis in a leaving-one-out cross validation setting without requiring labels of ground-truth matches. Then, the sensitivity is characterized by the variance of a sequence of motion estimates. We present a series of quantitative comparison such as accuracy and variance between Multi-Affine motion models and the global affine model.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tokgozoglu, H.N., Meisner, E.M., Kazhdan, M., Hager, G.D.: Color-based hybrid reconstruction for endoscopy. In: CVPR Workshops (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mirota, D., Wang, H., Taylor, R.H., Ishii, M., Gallia, G.L., Hager, G.D.: A system for video-based navigation for endoscopic endonasal skull base surgery. IEEE T-MI 31, 963–976 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Mori, K., Deguchi, D., Akiyama, K., Kitasaka, T., Maurer, C.R., Suenaga, Y., Takabatake, H., Mori, M., Natori, H.: Hybrid bronchoscope tracking using a magnetic tracking sensor and image registration. In: MICCAI (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ma, Y., Soatto, S., Kosecka, J., Sastry, S.: An Invitation to 3-D Vision. Springer, Berlin (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wu, C.: VisualSFM: A Visual Structure from Motion System. http://ccwu.me/vsfm/ (2011)

  6. Hartley, R.I., Zisserman, A.: Multiple View Geometry in Computer Vision, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Collins, T., Bartoli, A.: Towards live monocular 3D laparoscopy using shading and specularity information. In: Abolmaesumi, P., Joskowicz, L., Navab, N., Jannin, P. (eds.) IPCAI 2012. LNCS, vol. 7330, pp. 11–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nister, D.: An efficient solution to the five-point relative pose problem. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 26 756–770 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Matas, J., Chum, O., Urban, M., Pajdla, T.: Robust wide-baseline stereo from maximally stable extremal regions. In: BMVC (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lowe, D.: Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int. J. Comput. Vision 60 91–110 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Puerto-Souza, G.A., Mariottini, G.L.: Adaptive multi-affine (ama) feature-matching algorithm and its application to minimally-invasive surgery images. In: MICCAI (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Puerto-Souza, G.A., Mariottini, G.L.: Hierarchical multi-affine (HMA) algorithm for fast and accurate feature matching in minimally-invasive surgical images. In: IEEE IROS (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Puerto-Souza, G.A., Mariottini, G.L.: A fast and accurate feature-matching algorithm for minimally invasive endoscopic images. In: IEEE T-MI (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Szeliski, R.: Computer Vision: Algorithms and Applications. Springer, Berlin (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Abretske, D., Mirota, D., Hager, G.D., Ishii, M.: Intelligent frame selection for anatomic reconstruction from endoscopic video. In: WACV (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mirota, D.: Video-based navigation with application to endoscopic skull base surgery. Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University Computer Science (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wikipedia: Quaternion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaternion

  18. Wikipedia: Euler Angles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler_angles

  19. Wikipedia: Rotation Formalisms in Three Dimensions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotation_formalisms_in_three_dimensions

  20. Wikipedia: Euler’s Rotation Theorem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euler’s_rotation_theorem

  21. Caltech Vision Lab: Camera Calibration Toolbox for Matlab. http://www.vision.caltech.edu/bouguetj/calib_doc/ (2010)

  22. Vedaldi, A., Fulkerson, B.: VLFeat: an open and portable library of computer vision algorithms. http://www.vlfeat.org/ (2008)

  23. Puerto, G.A., Mariottini, G.L.: HMA feature-matching toolbox. http://ranger.uta.edu/~gianluca/feature_matching/ (2012)

  24. Torr, P.: Structure and motion toolkit. http://www.mathworks.com (2004)

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by NIH of USA under grant R01 EB015530. The first author is grateful for the fellowship from China Scholarship Council.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiang Xiang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Xiang, X., Mirota, D., Reiter, A., Hager, G.D. (2014). Is Multi-model Feature Matching Better for Endoscopic Motion Estimation?. In: Luo, X., Reichl, T., Mirota, D., Soper, T. (eds) Computer-Assisted and Robotic Endoscopy. CARE 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8899. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13410-9_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13410-9_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13409-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13410-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics