Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
167 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Non-rigid Structure-from-Motion: Temporally-smooth Procrustean Alignment and Spatially-variant Deformation Modeling (2405.04309v2)

Published 7 May 2024 in cs.CV and cs.AI

Abstract: Even though Non-rigid Structure-from-Motion (NRSfM) has been extensively studied and great progress has been made, there are still key challenges that hinder their broad real-world applications: 1) the inherent motion/rotation ambiguity requires either explicit camera motion recovery with extra constraint or complex Procrustean Alignment; 2) existing low-rank modeling of the global shape can over-penalize drastic deformations in the 3D shape sequence. This paper proposes to resolve the above issues from a spatial-temporal modeling perspective. First, we propose a novel Temporally-smooth Procrustean Alignment module that estimates 3D deforming shapes and adjusts the camera motion by aligning the 3D shape sequence consecutively. Our new alignment module remedies the requirement of complex reference 3D shape during alignment, which is more conductive to non-isotropic deformation modeling. Second, we propose a spatial-weighted approach to enforce the low-rank constraint adaptively at different locations to accommodate drastic spatially-variant deformation reconstruction better. Our modeling outperform existing low-rank based methods, and extensive experiments across different datasets validate the effectiveness of our method.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (50)
  1. Antonio Agudo. Unsupervised 3d reconstruction and grouping of rigid and non-rigid categories. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 44(1):519–532, 2020.
  2. Nonrigid structure from motion in trajectory space. In Adv. Neural Inform. Process. Syst., pages 41–48, 2008.
  3. In defense of orthonormality constraints for nonrigid structure from motion. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 1534–1541, 2009.
  4. Separability of pose and expression in facial tracking and animation. In Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 323–328, 1998.
  5. A morphable model for the synthesis of 3d faces. In Proceedings of the 26th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, pages 187–194, 1999.
  6. Distributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction method of multipliers. Foundations and Trends® in Machine learning, 3(1):1–122, 2011.
  7. Matthew Brand. A direct method for 3d factorization of nonrigid motion observed in 2d. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 122–128, 2005.
  8. Recovering non-rigid 3d shape from image streams. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 690–696, 2000.
  9. Unifying nuclear norm and bilinear factorization approaches for low-rank matrix decomposition. In Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 2488–2495, 2013.
  10. Reconstruct as far as you can: Consensus of non-rigid reconstruction from feasible regions. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 43(2):623–637, 2019.
  11. A simple prior-free method for non-rigid structure-from-motion factorization. Int. J. Comput. Vis., 107(2):101–122, 2014.
  12. Alessio Del Bue. A factorization approach to structure from motion with shape priors. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 1–8, 2008.
  13. Non-rigid metric shape and motion recovery from uncalibrated images using priors. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 1191–1198, 2006.
  14. Deep non-rigid structure-from-motion: A sequence-to-sequence translation perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.04730, 2022.
  15. Computing smooth time trajectories for camera and deformable shape in structure from motion with occlusion. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 33(10):2051–2065, 2011a.
  16. Kernel non-rigid structure from motion. In Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., page 802, 2011b.
  17. Non-rigid structure from motion with complementary rank-3 spaces. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 3065–3072, 2011c.
  18. John C Gower. Generalized procrustes analysis. Psychometrika, 40:33–51, 1975.
  19. Tensor-based non-rigid structure from motion. In IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision(WACV), pages 3011–3020, 2022.
  20. Reconstruction of a scene with multiple linearly moving objects. Int. J. Comput. Vis., 59:285–300, 2004.
  21. Accurate optimization of weighted nuclear norm for non-rigid structure from motion. In Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 21–37, 2020.
  22. Human3.6m: Large scale datasets and predictive methods for 3d human sensing in natural environments. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 36(7):1325–1339, 2013.
  23. A benchmark and evaluation of non-rigid structure from motion. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 129(4):882–899, 2021.
  24. Unsupervised 3d pose estimation with non-rigid structure-from-motion modeling. In IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), pages 3314–3323, 2024.
  25. Deep non-rigid structure from motion with missing data. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 43(12):4365–4377, 2021.
  26. Suryansh Kumar. Non-rigid structure from motion: Prior-free factorization method revisited. In IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV), pages 51–60, 2020.
  27. Organic priors in non-rigid structure from motion. In Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 71–88, 2022.
  28. Spatio-temporal union of subspaces for multi-body non-rigid structure-from-motion. Pattern Recognition, 71:428–443, 2017.
  29. Scalable dense non-rigid structure-from-motion: A grassmannian perspective. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 254–263, 2018.
  30. Procrustean normal distribution for non-rigid structure from motion. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 1280–1287, 2013.
  31. A procrustean markov process for non-rigid structure recovery. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., 2014.
  32. Consensus of non-rigid reconstructions. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 4670–4678, 2016.
  33. Numerical Optimization. Springer, New York, NY, USA, 2e edition, 2006.
  34. C3dpo: Canonical 3d pose networks for non-rigid structure from motion. In Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 7688–7697, 2019.
  35. Bilinear parameterization for non-separable singular value penalties. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 3897–3906, 2021.
  36. Factorization for non-rigid and articulated structure using metric projections. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 2898–2905, 2009.
  37. Optimal metric projections for deformable and articulated structure-from-motion. Int. J. Comput. Vis., 96:252–276, 2012.
  38. Isometric non-rigid shape-from-motion with riemannian geometry solved in linear time. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 40(10):2442–2454, 2017.
  39. Local deformable 3d reconstruction with cartan’s connections. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 42(12):3011–3026, 2019.
  40. Robust isometric non-rigid structure-from-motion. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 44(10):6409–6423, 2021.
  41. Procrustean regression: A flexible alignment-based framework for nonrigid structure estimation. IEEE Trans. Image Process., 27(1):249–264, 2017.
  42. Procrustean regression networks: Learning 3d structure of non-rigid objects from 2d annotations. In Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 1–18, 2020.
  43. Surface deformation models for nonrigid 3d shape recovery. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 29(8):1481–1487, 2007.
  44. Shape and motion from image streams under orthography: a factorization method. Int. J. Comput. Vis., 9(2):137–154, 1992.
  45. Nonrigid structure-from-motion: Estimating shape and motion with hierarchical priors. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell., 30(5):878–892, 2008.
  46. Template-free monocular reconstruction of deformable surfaces. In Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 1811–1818, 2009.
  47. A closed-form solution to non-rigid shape and motion recovery. In Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 573–587, 2004.
  48. Mhr-net: Multiple-hypothesis reconstruction of non-rigid shapes from 2d views. In Eur. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 1–17, 2022.
  49. Complex non-rigid motion 3d reconstruction by union of subspaces. In IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recog., pages 1542–1549, 2014.
  50. H3wb: Human3. 6m 3d wholebody dataset and benchmark. In Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., pages 20166–20177, 2023.

Summary

  • The paper introduces a temporally-smooth Procrustean Alignment module that corrects camera motion using consecutive frames.
  • It employs a spatially weighted low-rank modeling approach to adaptively manage drastic, spatially variant deformations.
  • Experiments on benchmark datasets demonstrate state-of-the-art results, highlighting both theoretical and practical advancements.

An Overview of Enhancements in Non-rigid Structure-from-Motion Using Spatial-Temporal Modeling

Introduction to Problem and Current Techniques

Non-rigid structure-from-motion (NRSfM) is a challenging problem that involves estimating 3D deforming shapes and camera motion from 2D observations. Despite the extensive research and development in this field, the problem persists mainly due to inherent motion/rotation ambiguity and the inability of existing methods to accurately handle drastic deformations in 3D shape sequences.

Traditionally, NRSfM has been tackled either through explicit motion estimation approaches using matrix factorization or motion estimation-free approaches exploiting Procrustean alignment techniques. Each of these approaches comes with its limitations, especially when dealing with non-isotropic deformations and solving ambiguities in motion and rotation.

Proposed Method

The latest research introduces a novel approach that looks at this problem through a spatial-temporal lens intending to overcome the limitations mentioned above. The primary contributions are:

  • Temporally-smooth Procrustean Alignment (TPA) Module: This innovative module enables the estimation of 3D deforming shapes by aligning a 3D shape sequence in a temporally smooth manner. Unlike traditional methods that require a fixed reference shape for alignment, the TPA module operates without one, using consecutive frames to correct the camera motion. This approach helps in reducing the impact of rotational ambiguities.
  • Spatial-Weighted Approach for Low-Rank Modeling: The method introduces a spatial-weighted mechanism to adaptively apply a low-rank constraint, allowing for better accommodation of drastic and spatially variant deformations in the sequence. This part of the framework analyzes the trajectory space of the observed data to segment regions based on the level of non-rigid deformation and then applies differing strengths of the low-rank constraint.

These components are unified in a singular framework where extensive experiments show that they not only address the traditional challenges of NRSfM effectively but also produce state-of-the-art results on several benchmark datasets.

Theoretical and Practical Implications

From a theoretical standpoint, the introduction of a spatial-temporal model presents a significant shift in how ambiguities are treated in NRSfM problem solving. The ability of the TPA to operate independently of a fixed reference shape and its adeptness in handling temporal smoothness open up new lanes in motion estimation techniques.

Practically, the ability to handle drastic deformations with spatially weighted low-rank models means that the new method can be applied to a wider range of real-world scenarios where traditional techniques faltered. For example, the medical imagery and augmented reality industries, where accurate and real-time 3D reconstruction is paramount, could greatly benefit from these advancements.

Future Directions

The current approach, while robust, sets the stage for several potential improvements and explorations. Further refinement of the spatial-weighting mechanism, automated handling of missing data (occlusions), and integration with deep learning architectures for initial approximations could enhance accuracy and applicability.

Additionally, expanding the framework to integrate seamlessly with other forms of sensory input and exploring its limits in extremely non-isotropic conditions would prove crucial in evolving the NRSfM landscape.

Concluding Thoughts

This paper's proposed method showcases a significant advance in handling the historical challenges faced in non-rigid structure-from-motion tasks. By intelligently combining spatial and temporal modeling, the researchers have laid down a framework that not only tackles existing theoretical and practical issues but also paves the way for next-generation NRSfM solutions. As the computer vision community continues to innovate, such foundational shifts in approach are critical in pushing the boundaries of what these technologies can achieve.