Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 144 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 48 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 21 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 23 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 99 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 197 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 428 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

SingRef6D: Monocular Novel Object Pose Estimation with a Single RGB Reference (2509.21927v1)

Published 26 Sep 2025 in cs.CV

Abstract: Recent 6D pose estimation methods demonstrate notable performance but still face some practical limitations. For instance, many of them rely heavily on sensor depth, which may fail with challenging surface conditions, such as transparent or highly reflective materials. In the meantime, RGB-based solutions provide less robust matching performance in low-light and texture-less scenes due to the lack of geometry information. Motivated by these, we propose SingRef6D, a lightweight pipeline requiring only a single RGB image as a reference, eliminating the need for costly depth sensors, multi-view image acquisition, or training view synthesis models and neural fields. This enables SingRef6D to remain robust and capable even under resource-limited settings where depth or dense templates are unavailable. Our framework incorporates two key innovations. First, we propose a token-scaler-based fine-tuning mechanism with a novel optimization loss on top of Depth-Anything v2 to enhance its ability to predict accurate depth, even for challenging surfaces. Our results show a 14.41% improvement (in $\delta_{1.05}$) on REAL275 depth prediction compared to Depth-Anything v2 (with fine-tuned head). Second, benefiting from depth availability, we introduce a depth-aware matching process that effectively integrates spatial relationships within LoFTR, enabling our system to handle matching for challenging materials and lighting conditions. Evaluations of pose estimation on the REAL275, ClearPose, and Toyota-Light datasets show that our approach surpasses state-of-the-art methods, achieving a 6.1% improvement in average recall.

Summary

  • The paper presents a novel method that estimates 6D object poses using only a single RGB reference, bypassing the need for CAD models and expensive depth sensors.
  • It employs a token-scaler approach in DPAv2 combined with a depth-aware matching process via a modified LoFTR to enhance spatial context and accuracy.
  • Experimental results show a 6.1% increase in average recall on datasets like REAL275, demonstrating improved performance especially with transparent and low-texture surfaces.

SingRef6D: Monocular Novel Object Pose Estimation with a Single RGB Reference

This paper introduces a novel approach to 6D object pose estimation, emphasizing a minimalistic requirement of only a single RGB image as a reference for new objects. The methodology leverages a fine-tuned version of Depth-Anything v2 (DPAv2) and a depth-aware matching process integrated with LoFTR for enhanced pose estimation.

Introduction

Traditional 6D pose estimation methods often depend on accurate depth sensors and CAD models, which can be limited by transparency and reflectivity issues, or substantial computational and training overhead. SingRef6D circumvents these limitations by bypassing expensive depth sensors and multi-view setups. It employs a lightweight pipeline for depth prediction and matching, designed to be resource-efficient and applicable under constrained scenarios.

Methodology

Depth Prediction with Token-Scaler

At the core of SingRef6D is an innovative depth prediction mechanism based on DPAv2. The paper introduces a token-scaler, a novel fine-tuning approach that adapts the depth model to enhance feature accuracy across varied surface conditions, including transparent materials. Figure 1

Figure 1: Visualized pipeline for inference; the depth model estimates metric depth, and depth-aware matching establishes robust correspondences.

The token-scaler mechanism adjusts features across multiple hierarchy levels in DPAv2, emulating human depth perception and allowing for consistent depth predictions.

Loss Function Design

The optimization of depth prediction involves a comprehensive loss scheme:

  • Global Loss: A combination of scale-shift invariant (SSI) and BerHu loss is used to penalize large residuals effectively.
  • Local Losses: These include scale alignment, edge-emphasize, and normal consistency measures that guide the model to maintain edge definition and align surfaces accurately.

Depth-Aware Matching

The second stage of SingRef6D integrates depth data into the matching process. LoFTR is modified to include depth values in its matching strategy, leading to improved spatial context understanding and increased accuracy, especially in low-texture areas.

Experimentation and Results

SingRef6D was evaluated on three datasets: REAL275, ClearPose, and Toyota-Light. It demonstrated significant improvements over traditional methods, achieving a 6.1% increase in average recall for pose estimation. Figure 2

Figure 2: Depth prediction and projected point clouds' comparisons; the proposed method handles transparency and scale better.

In depth estimation tasks, the model consistently showed enhanced δ1.05\delta_{1.05} accuracy metrics compared to baselines like Unidepth and vanilla DPAv2. Figure 3

Figure 3: Comparison with other depth estimation models highlights clear depth map outputs with retained details.

Comparison with Other Methods

The paper provides a detailed comparison of input data requirements and computational overhead against other contemporary methodologies. SingRef6D outperforms its counterparts in scenarios with limited resources by eliminating the need for extensive novel view synthesis or deep neural fields.

Trade-Offs and Limitations

While SingRef6D presents an efficient approach, its reliance on RGB segmentation masks holds back its generalizability. Moreover, the model's performance depends on the pre-trained capabilities of DPAv2 and LoFTR, limiting its applicability under extreme lighting conditions.

Conclusion

SingRef6D offers a robust framework for pose estimation using minimal references. By aligning depth perception with human-like spatial reasoning, it lays the groundwork for efficient real-world applications without extensive computational demands or data requirements.

As future directions, expanding the model's domain could involve integrating vision-LLMs for improved object localization and applying the token scaler for broader vision-transformer applications in low-resource settings. Figure 4

Figure 4: Predicted 6D poses highlight reduced rotation errors and translation shifts across datasets.

Ai Generate Text Spark Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Knowledge Gaps

Knowledge gaps, limitations, and open questions

Below is a consolidated list of issues the paper leaves unresolved or only partially addresses. Each point is phrased to guide actionable follow-up work.

  • Dependence on object masks: the pipeline assumes access to reliable object segmentation (e.g., SAM). The impact of mask noise, partial masks, or missed detections on pose accuracy is not quantified. Robustness to imperfect masks (e.g., via mask erosion/dilation, IoU sweeps) and mask-free localization strategies remain open.
  • Sensitivity to reference selection: guidelines and experiments on how the chosen single reference view (viewpoint, scale, lighting, background) affects success rates are missing. Automated reference selection or reference augmentation policies are unexplored.
  • Viewpoint gap limits: while depth priors aim to expand the effective view space, the maximum tolerable reference–query pose gap (e.g., rotation/translation/scale differences) is not systematically characterized.
  • Occlusion robustness: performance under varying levels/types of occlusion (self-occlusion vs. external, partial vs. heavy) is not studied. Active occlusion handling (e.g., occlusion-aware matching or completion) is an open problem.
  • Symmetric object ambiguity: the method does not explicitly model or resolve pose ambiguities for symmetric objects. Strategies for symmetric-aware matching and hypothesis disambiguation are not explored.
  • Camera intrinsics and cross-camera generalization: requirements for known/unknown intrinsics are not made explicit, and cross-device generalization of metric scale is untested. How well the metric depth scale transfers across cameras with different intrinsics/sensors is unclear.
  • Cross-domain generalization: fine-tuning uses dataset-specific supervision; robustness to domain shifts (outdoor scenes, different materials, sensors, extreme lighting, motion blur, HDR, noise) is not evaluated.
  • Transparent/reflective materials: despite improvements, performance on ClearPose remains modest. How to further handle non-Lambertian effects (e.g., refractive distortions) without violating the single-RGB constraint is open (e.g., polarization cues, learned refraction compensation).
  • Depth label quality and sparsity: training on datasets with missing/invalid ground-truth depth (especially for transparent objects) is under-specified. Handling incomplete/noisy supervision (e.g., confidence-aware losses, masked losses) is not addressed.
  • Depth uncertainty: predicted depth is treated deterministically. Uncertainty estimation and its use in matching/registration (e.g., uncertainty-weighted correspondence selection, robust solvers) is unexplored.
  • Depth–RGB fusion design: the current additive latent fusion with a frozen LoFTR may be suboptimal. Alternatives (cross-attention between RGB/depth streams, learnable fusion, fine-tuning the matcher end-to-end, 3D positional encodings) are not investigated.
  • Pose solver sensitivity: reliance on PointDSC is not compared to alternative estimators (e.g., TEASER++, robust PnP variants, generalized ICP). Sensitivity to outliers, correspondence density, and initializations remains unquantified.
  • Error propagation analysis: there is no end-to-end uncertainty/error budget tracing from segmentation → depth → matching → registration. Methods to detect/predict failure and calibrate confidence of the final pose are missing.
  • Runtime and deployment metrics: while parameter/GFLOP counts are reported for matchers, full pipeline latency, throughput (FPS), and memory on representative CPUs/edge GPUs are absent. Power/latency trade-offs for real-time robotics use remain unknown.
  • Absolute scale fidelity: translation accuracy hinges on metric depth scale. The relationship between depth scale errors and 6D translation errors (across distances and scenes) is not analyzed, nor are scale correction strategies (e.g., scene-level constraints) explored.
  • Multi-object, cluttered scenes: beyond per-object ROI cropping, robustness to distractors, similar instances, and heavy clutter is not assessed. Failure modes due to background structures at similar depth are not quantified.
  • Reference–query device mismatch: effects of capturing the reference with a different camera/device than the query (intrinsics/spectral response/noise characteristics) are unstudied.
  • Training data efficiency: data–performance scaling is only partially explored. Minimal supervision needed for useful performance, and the role of self-/weak supervision or synthetic data for the token scaler remain open.
  • Token-scaler design space: ablations focus on losses and a few FT paradigms; a broader paper on where/how to insert scalers, model capacity, and alternative re-weighting architectures (e.g., low-rank adapters, gating) is missing.
  • Failure in extreme darkness: the method fails when RGB contains little signal. Lightweight strategies for low-light robustness (e.g., denoising, exposure fusion, learned enhancement) are not investigated.
  • Handling texture-less planar objects and repeated patterns: explicit stress tests for these challenging cases are absent; techniques like geometric priors or global shape constraints are not examined.
  • Articulated and deformable objects: the approach targets rigid objects; extensions to articulated or deformable targets (and corresponding evaluation) are left open.
  • Symmetry- and pose-consistent evaluation: while ADD(S) is reported, a deeper analysis of ambiguous-pose metrics and pose distributions for symmetric classes is missing.
  • Reference-free or weakly supervised localization: integrating VLMs for localization is mentioned as future work, but no concrete pipeline or evaluation with noisy text prompts or open-vocabulary settings is provided.
  • Scalability and memory for large catalogs: although per-object CAD is avoided, scalability to many concurrent objects/references and memory management for reference descriptors are not discussed.
  • Robustness to mask–depth misalignment: potential misalignment between segmentation boundaries and depth discontinuities (and its impact on correspondence quality) is not analyzed; boundary-aware matching remains open.
  • Choice of fusion stage(s): only one latent fusion strategy is evaluated; comparing early vs. mid vs. late fusion (and multi-stage fusion) for depth-aware matching is an open design question.
Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Open Questions

We haven't generated a list of open questions mentioned in this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.