skip to main content

This content will become publicly available on June 20, 2023

Title: On the Instability of Relative Pose Estimation and RANSAC's Role
Relative pose estimation using the 5-point or 7-point Random Sample Consensus (RANSAC) algorithms can fail even when no outliers are present and there are enough inliers to support a hypothesis. These cases arise due to numerical instability of the 5- and 7-point minimal problems. This paper characterizes these instabilities, both in terms of minimal world scene configurations that lead to infinite condition number in epipolar estimation, and also in terms of the related minimal image feature pair correspondence configurations. The instability is studied in the context of a novel framework for analyzing the conditioning of minimal problems in multiview geometry, based on Riemannian manifolds. Experiments with synthetic and real-world data reveal that RANSAC does not only serve to filter out outliers, but RANSAC also selects for well-conditioned image data, sufficiently separated from the ill-posed locus that our theory predicts. These findings suggest that, in future work, one could try to accelerate and increase the success of RANSAC by testing only well-conditioned image data.
Award ID(s):
Publication Date:
Journal Name:
IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Page Range or eLocation-ID:
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. The DeepLearningEpilepsyDetectionChallenge: design, implementation, andtestofanewcrowd-sourced AIchallengeecosystem Isabell Kiral*, Subhrajit Roy*, Todd Mummert*, Alan Braz*, Jason Tsay, Jianbin Tang, Umar Asif, Thomas Schaffter, Eren Mehmet, The IBM Epilepsy Consortium◊ , Joseph Picone, Iyad Obeid, Bruno De Assis Marques, Stefan Maetschke, Rania Khalaf†, Michal Rosen-Zvi† , Gustavo Stolovitzky† , Mahtab Mirmomeni† , Stefan Harrer† * These authors contributed equally to this work † Corresponding authors:,,,, ◊ Members of the IBM Epilepsy Consortium are listed in the Acknowledgements section J. Picone and I. Obeid are with Temple University, USA. T. Schaffter is with Sage Bionetworks, USA. E. Mehmet is with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA. All other authors are with IBM Research in USA, Israel and Australia. Introduction This decade has seen an ever-growing number of scientific fields benefitting from the advances in machine learning technology and tooling. More recently, this trend reached the medical domain, with applications reaching from cancer diagnosis [1] to the development of brain-machine-interfaces [2]. While Kaggle has pioneered the crowd-sourcing of machine learning challenges to incentivise data scientists from around the world to advance algorithm and model design, the increasing complexity of problem statements demands of participants to be expert datamore »scientists, deeply knowledgeable in at least one other scientific domain, and competent software engineers with access to large compute resources. People who match this description are few and far between, unfortunately leading to a shrinking pool of possible participants and a loss of experts dedicating their time to solving important problems. Participation is even further restricted in the context of any challenge run on confidential use cases or with sensitive data. Recently, we designed and ran a deep learning challenge to crowd-source the development of an automated labelling system for brain recordings, aiming to advance epilepsy research. A focus of this challenge, run internally in IBM, was the development of a platform that lowers the barrier of entry and therefore mitigates the risk of excluding interested parties from participating. The challenge: enabling wide participation With the goal to run a challenge that mobilises the largest possible pool of participants from IBM (global), we designed a use case around previous work in epileptic seizure prediction [3]. In this “Deep Learning Epilepsy Detection Challenge”, participants were asked to develop an automatic labelling system to reduce the time a clinician would need to diagnose patients with epilepsy. Labelled training and blind validation data for the challenge were generously provided by Temple University Hospital (TUH) [4]. TUH also devised a novel scoring metric for the detection of seizures that was used as basis for algorithm evaluation [5]. In order to provide an experience with a low barrier of entry, we designed a generalisable challenge platform under the following principles: 1. No participant should need to have in-depth knowledge of the specific domain. (i.e. no participant should need to be a neuroscientist or epileptologist.) 2. No participant should need to be an expert data scientist. 3. No participant should need more than basic programming knowledge. (i.e. no participant should need to learn how to process fringe data formats and stream data efficiently.) 4. No participant should need to provide their own computing resources. In addition to the above, our platform should further • guide participants through the entire process from sign-up to model submission, • facilitate collaboration, and • provide instant feedback to the participants through data visualisation and intermediate online leaderboards. The platform The architecture of the platform that was designed and developed is shown in Figure 1. The entire system consists of a number of interacting components. (1) A web portal serves as the entry point to challenge participation, providing challenge information, such as timelines and challenge rules, and scientific background. The portal also facilitated the formation of teams and provided participants with an intermediate leaderboard of submitted results and a final leaderboard at the end of the challenge. (2) IBM Watson Studio [6] is the umbrella term for a number of services offered by IBM. Upon creation of a user account through the web portal, an IBM Watson Studio account was automatically created for each participant that allowed users access to IBM's Data Science Experience (DSX), the analytics engine Watson Machine Learning (WML), and IBM's Cloud Object Storage (COS) [7], all of which will be described in more detail in further sections. (3) The user interface and starter kit were hosted on IBM's Data Science Experience platform (DSX) and formed the main component for designing and testing models during the challenge. DSX allows for real-time collaboration on shared notebooks between team members. A starter kit in the form of a Python notebook, supporting the popular deep learning libraries TensorFLow [8] and PyTorch [9], was provided to all teams to guide them through the challenge process. Upon instantiation, the starter kit loaded necessary python libraries and custom functions for the invisible integration with COS and WML. In dedicated spots in the notebook, participants could write custom pre-processing code, machine learning models, and post-processing algorithms. The starter kit provided instant feedback about participants' custom routines through data visualisations. Using the notebook only, teams were able to run the code on WML, making use of a compute cluster of IBM's resources. The starter kit also enabled submission of the final code to a data storage to which only the challenge team had access. (4) Watson Machine Learning provided access to shared compute resources (GPUs). Code was bundled up automatically in the starter kit and deployed to and run on WML. WML in turn had access to shared storage from which it requested recorded data and to which it stored the participant's code and trained models. (5) IBM's Cloud Object Storage held the data for this challenge. Using the starter kit, participants could investigate their results as well as data samples in order to better design custom algorithms. (6) Utility Functions were loaded into the starter kit at instantiation. This set of functions included code to pre-process data into a more common format, to optimise streaming through the use of the NutsFlow and NutsML libraries [10], and to provide seamless access to the all IBM services used. Not captured in the diagram is the final code evaluation, which was conducted in an automated way as soon as code was submitted though the starter kit, minimising the burden on the challenge organising team. Figure 1: High-level architecture of the challenge platform Measuring success The competitive phase of the "Deep Learning Epilepsy Detection Challenge" ran for 6 months. Twenty-five teams, with a total number of 87 scientists and software engineers from 14 global locations participated. All participants made use of the starter kit we provided and ran algorithms on IBM's infrastructure WML. Seven teams persisted until the end of the challenge and submitted final solutions. The best performing solutions reached seizure detection performances which allow to reduce hundred-fold the time eliptologists need to annotate continuous EEG recordings. Thus, we expect the developed algorithms to aid in the diagnosis of epilepsy by significantly shortening manual labelling time. Detailed results are currently in preparation for publication. Equally important to solving the scientific challenge, however, was to understand whether we managed to encourage participation from non-expert data scientists. Figure 2: Primary occupation as reported by challenge participants Out of the 40 participants for whom we have occupational information, 23 reported Data Science or AI as their main job description, 11 reported being a Software Engineer, and 2 people had expertise in Neuroscience. Figure 2 shows that participants had a variety of specialisations, including some that are in no way related to data science, software engineering, or neuroscience. No participant had deep knowledge and experience in data science, software engineering and neuroscience. Conclusion Given the growing complexity of data science problems and increasing dataset sizes, in order to solve these problems, it is imperative to enable collaboration between people with differences in expertise with a focus on inclusiveness and having a low barrier of entry. We designed, implemented, and tested a challenge platform to address exactly this. Using our platform, we ran a deep-learning challenge for epileptic seizure detection. 87 IBM employees from several business units including but not limited to IBM Research with a variety of skills, including sales and design, participated in this highly technical challenge.« less
  2. Obeid, I. ; Selesnik, I. ; Picone, J. (Ed.)
    The Neuronix high-performance computing cluster allows us to conduct extensive machine learning experiments on big data [1]. This heterogeneous cluster uses innovative scheduling technology, Slurm [2], that manages a network of CPUs and graphics processing units (GPUs). The GPU farm consists of a variety of processors ranging from low-end consumer grade devices such as the Nvidia GTX 970 to higher-end devices such as the GeForce RTX 2080. These GPUs are essential to our research since they allow extremely compute-intensive deep learning tasks to be executed on massive data resources such as the TUH EEG Corpus [2]. We use TensorFlow [3] as the core machine learning library for our deep learning systems, and routinely employ multiple GPUs to accelerate the training process. Reproducible results are essential to machine learning research. Reproducibility in this context means the ability to replicate an existing experiment – performance metrics such as error rates should be identical and floating-point calculations should match closely. Three examples of ways we typically expect an experiment to be replicable are: (1) The same job run on the same processor should produce the same results each time it is run. (2) A job run on a CPU and GPU should producemore »identical results. (3) A job should produce comparable results if the data is presented in a different order. System optimization requires an ability to directly compare error rates for algorithms evaluated under comparable operating conditions. However, it is a difficult task to exactly reproduce the results for large, complex deep learning systems that often require more than a trillion calculations per experiment [5]. This is a fairly well-known issue and one we will explore in this poster. Researchers must be able to replicate results on a specific data set to establish the integrity of an implementation. They can then use that implementation as a baseline for comparison purposes. A lack of reproducibility makes it very difficult to debug algorithms and validate changes to the system. Equally important, since many results in deep learning research are dependent on the order in which the system is exposed to the data, the specific processors used, and even the order in which those processors are accessed, it becomes a challenging problem to compare two algorithms since each system must be individually optimized for a specific data set or processor. This is extremely time-consuming for algorithm research in which a single run often taxes a computing environment to its limits. Well-known techniques such as cross-validation [5,6] can be used to mitigate these effects, but this is also computationally expensive. These issues are further compounded by the fact that most deep learning algorithms are susceptible to the way computational noise propagates through the system. GPUs are particularly notorious for this because, in a clustered environment, it becomes more difficult to control which processors are used at various points in time. Another equally frustrating issue is that upgrades to the deep learning package, such as the transition from TensorFlow v1.9 to v1.13, can also result in large fluctuations in error rates when re-running the same experiment. Since TensorFlow is constantly updating functions to support GPU use, maintaining an historical archive of experimental results that can be used to calibrate algorithm research is quite a challenge. This makes it very difficult to optimize the system or select the best configurations. The overall impact of all of these issues described above is significant as error rates can fluctuate by as much as 25% due to these types of computational issues. Cross-validation is one technique used to mitigate this, but that is expensive since you need to do multiple runs over the data, which further taxes a computing infrastructure already running at max capacity. GPUs are preferred when training a large network since these systems train at least two orders of magnitude faster than CPUs [7]. Large-scale experiments are simply not feasible without using GPUs. However, there is a tradeoff to gain this performance. Since all our GPUs use the NVIDIA CUDA® Deep Neural Network library (cuDNN) [8], a GPU-accelerated library of primitives for deep neural networks, it adds an element of randomness into the experiment. When a GPU is used to train a network in TensorFlow, it automatically searches for a cuDNN implementation. NVIDIA’s cuDNN implementation provides algorithms that increase the performance and help the model train quicker, but they are non-deterministic algorithms [9,10]. Since our networks have many complex layers, there is no easy way to avoid this randomness. Instead of comparing each epoch, we compare the average performance of the experiment because it gives us a hint of how our model is performing per experiment, and if the changes we make are efficient. In this poster, we will discuss a variety of issues related to reproducibility and introduce ways we mitigate these effects. For example, TensorFlow uses a random number generator (RNG) which is not seeded by default. TensorFlow determines the initialization point and how certain functions execute using the RNG. The solution for this is seeding all the necessary components before training the model. This forces TensorFlow to use the same initialization point and sets how certain layers work (e.g., dropout layers). However, seeding all the RNGs will not guarantee a controlled experiment. Other variables can affect the outcome of the experiment such as training using GPUs, allowing multi-threading on CPUs, using certain layers, etc. To mitigate our problems with reproducibility, we first make sure that the data is processed in the same order during training. Therefore, we save the data from the last experiment and to make sure the newer experiment follows the same order. If we allow the data to be shuffled, it can affect the performance due to how the model was exposed to the data. We also specify the float data type to be 32-bit since Python defaults to 64-bit. We try to avoid using 64-bit precision because the numbers produced by a GPU can vary significantly depending on the GPU architecture [11-13]. Controlling precision somewhat reduces differences due to computational noise even though technically it increases the amount of computational noise. We are currently developing more advanced techniques for preserving the efficiency of our training process while also maintaining the ability to reproduce models. In our poster presentation we will demonstrate these issues using some novel visualization tools, present several examples of the extent to which these issues influence research results on electroencephalography (EEG) and digital pathology experiments and introduce new ways to manage such computational issues.« less
  3. Embedding properties of network realizations of dissipative reduced order models Jörn Zimmerling, Mikhail Zaslavsky,Rob Remis, Shasri Moskow, Alexander Mamonov, Murthy Guddati, Vladimir Druskin, and Liliana Borcea Mathematical Sciences Department, Worcester Polytechnic Institute Abstract Realizations of reduced order models of passive SISO or MIMO LTI problems can be transformed to tridiagonal and block-tridiagonal forms, respectively, via dierent modications of the Lanczos algorithm. Generally, such realizations can be interpreted as ladder resistor-capacitor-inductor (RCL) networks. They gave rise to network syntheses in the rst half of the 20th century that was at the base of modern electronics design and consecutively to MOR that tremendously impacted many areas of engineering (electrical, mechanical, aerospace, etc.) by enabling ecient compression of the underlining dynamical systems. In his seminal 1950s works Krein realized that in addition to their compressing properties, network realizations can be used to embed the data back into the state space of the underlying continuum problems. In more recent works of the authors Krein's ideas gave rise to so-called nite-dierence Gaussian quadrature rules (FDGQR), allowing to approximately map the ROM state-space representation to its full order continuum counterpart on a judicially chosen grid. Thus, the state variables can be accessed directly from themore »transfer function without solving the full problem and even explicit knowledge of the PDE coecients in the interior, i.e., the FDGQR directly learns" the problem from its transfer function. This embedding property found applications in PDE solvers, inverse problems and unsupervised machine learning. Here we show a generalization of this approach to dissipative PDE problems, e.g., electromagnetic and acoustic wave propagation in lossy dispersive media. Potential applications include solution of inverse scattering problems in dispersive media, such as seismic exploration, radars and sonars. To x the idea, we consider a passive irreducible SISO ROM fn(s) = Xn j=1 yi s + σj , (62) assuming that all complex terms in (62) come in conjugate pairs. We will seek ladder realization of (62) as rjuj + vj − vj−1 = −shˆjuj , uj+1 − uj + ˆrj vj = −shj vj , (63) for j = 0, . . . , n with boundary conditions un+1 = 0, v1 = −1, and 4n real parameters hi, hˆi, ri and rˆi, i = 1, . . . , n, that can be considered, respectively, as the equivalent discrete inductances, capacitors and also primary and dual conductors. Alternatively, they can be viewed as respectively masses, spring stiness, primary and dual dampers of a mechanical string. Reordering variables would bring (63) into tridiagonal form, so from the spectral measure given by (62 ) the coecients of (63) can be obtained via a non-symmetric Lanczos algorithm written in J-symmetric form and fn(s) can be equivalently computed as fn(s) = u1. The cases considered in the original FDGQR correspond to either (i) real y, θ or (ii) real y and imaginary θ. Both cases are covered by the Stieltjes theorem, that yields in case (i) real positive h, hˆ and trivial r, rˆ, and in case (ii) real positive h,r and trivial hˆ,rˆ. This result allowed us a simple interpretation of (62) as the staggered nite-dierence approximation of the underlying PDE problem [2]. For PDEs in more than one variables (including topologically rich data-manifolds), a nite-dierence interpretation is obtained via a MIMO extensions in block form, e.g., [4, 3]. The main diculty of extending this approach to general passive problems is that the Stieltjes theory is no longer applicable. Moreover, the tridiagonal realization of a passive ROM transfer function (62) via the ladder network (63) cannot always be obtained in port-Hamiltonian form, i.e., the equivalent primary and dual conductors may change sign [1]. 100 Embedding of the Stieltjes problems, e.g., the case (i) was done by mapping h and hˆ into values of acoustic (or electromagnetic) impedance at grid cells, that required a special coordinate stretching (known as travel time coordinate transform) for continuous problems. Likewise, to circumvent possible non-positivity of conductors for the non-Stieltjes case, we introduce an additional complex s-dependent coordinate stretching, vanishing as s → ∞ [1]. This stretching applied in the discrete setting induces a diagonal factorization, removes oscillating coecients, and leads to an accurate embedding for moderate variations of the coecients of the continuum problems, i.e., it maps discrete coecients onto the values of their continuum counterparts. Not only does this embedding yields an approximate linear algebraic algorithm for the solution of the inverse problems for dissipative PDEs, it also leads to new insight into the properties of their ROM realizations. We will also discuss another approach to embedding, based on Krein-Nudelman theory [5], that results in special data-driven adaptive grids. References [1] Borcea, Liliana and Druskin, Vladimir and Zimmerling, Jörn, A reduced order model approach to inverse scattering in lossy layered media, Journal of Scientic Computing, V. 89, N1, pp. 136,2021 [2] Druskin, Vladimir and Knizhnerman, Leonid, Gaussian spectral rules for the three-point second dierences: I. A two-point positive denite problem in a semi-innite domain, SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, V. 37, N 2, pp.403422, 1999 [3] Druskin, Vladimir and Mamonov, Alexander V and Zaslavsky, Mikhail, Distance preserving model order reduction of graph-Laplacians and cluster analysis, Druskin, Vladimir and Mamonov, Alexander V and Zaslavsky, Mikhail, Journal of Scientic Computing, V. 90, N 1, pp 130, 2022 [4] Druskin, Vladimir and Moskow, Shari and Zaslavsky, Mikhail LippmannSchwingerLanczos algorithm for inverse scattering problems, Inverse Problems, V. 37, N. 7, 2021, [5] Mark Adolfovich Nudelman The Krein String and Characteristic Functions of Maximal Dissipative Operators, Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 2004, V 124, pp 49184934 Go back to Plenary Speakers Go back to Speakers Go back« less
  4. SUMMARY Inverse problems play a central role in data analysis across the fields of science. Many techniques and algorithms provide parameter estimation including the best-fitting model and the parameters statistics. Here, we concern ourselves with the robustness of parameter estimation under constraints, with the focus on assimilation of noisy data with potential outliers, a situation all too familiar in Earth science, particularly in analysis of remote-sensing data. We assume a linear, or linearized, forward model relating the model parameters to multiple data sets with a priori unknown uncertainties that are left to be characterized. This is relevant for global navigation satellite system and synthetic aperture radar data that involve intricate processing for which uncertainty estimation is not available. The model is constrained by additional equalities and inequalities resulting from the physics of the problem, but the weights of equalities are unknown. We formulate the problem from a Bayesian perspective with non-informative priors. The posterior distribution of the model parameters, weights and outliers conditioned on the observations are then inferred via Gibbs sampling. We demonstrate the practical utility of the method based on a set of challenging inverse problems with both synthetic and real space-geodetic data associated with earthquakes and nuclearmore »explosions. We provide the associated computer codes and expect the approach to be of practical interest for a wide range of applications.« less
  5. Positron emission tomography (PET) is traditionally modeled as discrete systems. Such models may be viewed as piecewise constant approximations of the underlying continuous model for the physical processes and geometry of the PET imaging. Due to the low accuracy of piecewise constant approximations, discrete models introduce an irreducible modeling error which fundamentally limits the quality of reconstructed images. To address this bottleneck, we propose an integral equation model for the PET imaging based on the physical and geometrical considerations, which describes accurately the true coincidences. We show that the proposed integral equation model is equivalent to the existing idealized model in terms of line integrals which is accurate but not suitable for numerical approximation. The proposed model allows us to discretize it using higher accuracy approximation methods. In particular, we discretize the integral equation by using the collocation principle with piecewise linear polynomials. The discretization leads to new ill-conditioned discrete systems for the PET reconstruction, which are further regularized by a novel wavelet-based regularizer. The resulting non-smooth optimization problem is then solved by a preconditioned proximity fixed-point algorithm. Convergence of the algorithm is established for a range of parameters involved in the algorithm. The proposed integral equation model combined withmore »the discretization, regularization, and optimization algorithm provides a new PET image reconstruction method. Numerical results reveal that the proposed model substantially outperforms the conventional discrete model in terms of the consistency to simulated projection data and reconstructed image quality. This indicates that the proposed integral equation model with appropriate discretization and regularizer can significantly reduce modeling errors and suppress noise, which leads to improved image quality and projection data estimation.« less