Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Manjunath Narayana
dblp:65/501
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
6as first author
2since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 8 · 6 first-author · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 6 · 4 first-author · 2 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
4 papers |
Robot navigation and mapping · 43% 3D vision · 28% Video understanding and tracking · 18% | |
| Computer graphics and multimedia
2 papers |
Geometric modeling and processing · 84% Virtual and augmented reality · 13% Image and video processing · 3% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping › localization › probabilistic localization
monte carlo localization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | LASER: LAtent SpacE Rendering for 2D Visual Localization · CVPR 2022 |
Robotics › Robot navigation and mapping › localization
vision-based localization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | LASER: LAtent SpacE Rendering for 2D Visual Localization · CVPR 2022 |
Computer vision › 3D vision
visual localization |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | LASER: LAtent SpacE Rendering for 2D Visual Localization · CVPR 2022 |
Geometric modeling and processing
3d reconstruction |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | SALVe: Semantic Alignment Verification for Floorplan Reconstruction from Sparse Panoramas · ECCV (31) 2022 |
Geometric modeling and processing › 3d reconstruction › indoor scene reconstruction
floorplan reconstruction |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | SALVe: Semantic Alignment Verification for Floorplan Reconstruction from Sparse Panoramas · ECCV (31) 2022 |
Computer vision › 3D vision
3d scene understanding |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | LASER: LAtent SpacE Rendering for 2D Visual Localization · CVPR 2022 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking
motion segmentation |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Coherent Motion Segmentation in Moving Camera Videos Using Optical Flow Orientations · ICCV 2013 |
Computer vision › Segmentation and scene understanding
video segmentation |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Coherent Motion Segmentation in Moving Camera Videos Using Optical Flow Orientations · ICCV 2013 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking
background subtraction |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Background modeling using adaptive pixelwise kernel variances in a hybrid feature space · CVPR 2012 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference › density estimation
kernel density estimation |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Background modeling using adaptive pixelwise kernel variances in a hybrid feature space · CVPR 2012 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking › object tracking › probabilistic tracking
bayesian tracking |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | A Bayesian algorithm for tracking multiple moving objects in outdoor surveillance video · CVPR 2007 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking
multi-object tracking |
0.1 | 1 | 2007 | A Bayesian algorithm for tracking multiple moving objects in outdoor surveillance video · CVPR 2007 |
Image and video processing
feature representation |
0.0 | 1 | 2012 | Background modeling using adaptive pixelwise kernel variances in a hybrid feature space · CVPR 2012 |
Computer vision › Video understanding and tracking
video surveillance |
0.0 | 1 | 2007 | A Bayesian algorithm for tracking multiple moving objects in outdoor surveillance video · CVPR 2007 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
verification · 0.6semantic alignment · 0.6metric learning · 0.6latent space rendering · 0.6scale-invariant local ternary patterns · 0.3local binary pattern · 0.3joint domain-range density estimation · 0.3probabilistic model · 0.2optical flow orientation · 0.2color and position observations · 0.1bayesian inference · 0.1
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | LASER: LAtent SpacE Rendering for 2D Visual LocalizationabstractWe present LASER, an image-based Monte Carlo Localization (MCL) framework for 2D floor maps. LASER introduces the concept of latent space rendering, where 2D pose hypotheses on the floor map are directly rendered into a geometrically-structured latent space by aggregating viewing ray features. Through a tightly coupled rendering codebook scheme, the viewing ray features are dynamically determined at rendering-time based on their geometries (i.e. length, incident-angle), endowing our representation with view-dependent fine-grain variability. Our codebook scheme effectively disentangles feature encoding from rendering, allowing the latent space rendering to run at speeds above 10KHz. Moreover, through metric learning, our geometrically-structured latent space is common to both pose hypotheses and query images with arbitrary field of views. As a result, LASER achieves state-of-the-art performance on large-scale indoor localization datasets (i. e. ZInD [5] and Structured3D [38]) for both panorama and perspective image queries, while significantly outperforming existing learning-based methods in speed. Zhixiang Min, Naji Khosravan, Zachary Bessinger, Manjunath Narayana, Sing Bing Kang, Enrique Dunn, Ivaylo Boyadzhiev |
CVPR | 4 |
| 2022 | SALVe: Semantic Alignment Verification for Floorplan Reconstruction from Sparse Panoramas
John Lambert, Yuguang Li, Ivaylo Boyadzhiev, Lambert Wixson, Manjunath Narayana, Will Hutchcroft, James Hays, Frank Dellaert, Sing Bing Kang |
ECCV (31) | 5 |
| 2020 | Lifelong update of semantic maps in dynamic environmentsabstractA robot understands its world through the raw information it senses from its surroundings. This raw information is not suitable as a shared representation between the robot and its user. A semantic map, containing high-level information that both the robot and user understand, is better suited to be a shared representation. We use the semantic map as the user-facing interface on our fleet of floor-cleaning robots. Jitter in the robot's sensed raw map, dynamic objects in the environment, and exploration of new space by the robot are common challenges for robots. Solving these challenges effectively in the context of semantic maps is key to enabling semantic maps for lifelong mapping. First, as a robot senses new changes and alters its raw map in successive runs, the semantics must be updated appropriately. We update the map using a spatial transfer of semantics. Second, it is important to keep semantics and their relative constraints consistent even in the presence of dynamic objects. Inconsistencies are automatically determined and resolved through the introduction of a map layer of meta-semantics. Finally, a discovery phase allows the semantic map to be updated with new semantics whenever the robot uncovers new information. Deployed commercially on thousands of floor-cleaning robots in real homes, our user-facing semantic maps provide a intuitive user experience through a lifelong mapping robot. Manjunath Narayana, Andreas Kolling, Lucio Nardelli, Philip W. Fong |
IROS | 1 |
| 2014 | Background subtraction: separating the modeling and the inference
Manjunath Narayana, Allen R. Hanson, Erik G. Learned-Miller |
Mach. Vis. Appl. | 1 |
| 2013 | Coherent Motion Segmentation in Moving Camera Videos Using Optical Flow OrientationsabstractIn moving camera videos, motion segmentation is commonly performed using the image plane motion of pixels, or optical flow. However, objects that are at different depths from the camera can exhibit different optical flows even if they share the same real-world motion. This can cause a depth-dependent segmentation of the scene. Our goal is to develop a segmentation algorithm that clusters pixels that have similar real-world motion irrespective of their depth in the scene. Our solution uses optical flow orientations instead of the complete vectors and exploits the well-known property that under camera translation, optical flow orientations are independent of object depth. We introduce a probabilistic model that automatically estimates the number of observed independent motions and results in a labeling that is consistent with real-world motion in the scene. The result of our system is that static objects are correctly identified as one segment, even if they are at different depths. Color features and information from previous frames in the video sequence are used to correct occasional errors due to the orientation-based segmentation. We present results on more than thirty videos from different benchmarks. The system is particularly robust on complex background scenes containing objects at significantly different depths. Manjunath Narayana, Allen R. Hanson, Erik G. Learned-Miller |
ICCV | 1 |
| 2012 | Improvements in Joint Domain-Range Modeling for Background SubtractionabstractIn many algorithms for background modeling, a distribution over feature values is modeled at each pixel. These models, however, do not account for the dependencies that may exist among nearby pixels. The joint domain-range kernel density estimate (KDE) model by Sheikh and Shah [7], which is not a pixel-wise model, represents the background and foreground processes by combining the three color dimensions and two spatial dimensions into a five-dimensional joint space. The Sheikh and Shah model, as we will show, has a peculiar dependence on the size of the image. In contrast, we build three-dimensional color distributions at each pixel and allow neighboring pixels to influence each other’s distributions. Our model is easy to interpret, does not exhibit the dependency on image size, and results in higher accuracy. Also, unlike Sheikh and Shah, we build an explicit model of the prior probability of the background and the foreground at each pixel. Finally, we use the adaptive kernel variance method of Narayana et al. [5] to adapt the KDE covariance at each pixel. With a simpler and more intuitive model, we can better interpret and visualize the effects of the adaptive kernel variance method, while achieving accuracy comparable to state-of-the-art on a standard backgrounding benchmark. 1 Manjunath Narayana, Allen R. Hanson, Erik G. Learned-Miller |
BMVC | 1 |
| 2012 | Background modeling using adaptive pixelwise kernel variances in a hybrid feature spaceabstractRecent work on background subtraction has shown developments on two major fronts. In one, there has been increasing sophistication of probabilistic models, from mixtures of Gaussians at each pixel [7], to kernel density estimates at each pixel [1], and more recently to joint domainrange density estimates that incorporate spatial information [6]. Another line of work has shown the benefits of increasingly complex feature representations, including the use of texture information, local binary patterns, and recently scale-invariant local ternary patterns [4]. In this work, we use joint domain-range based estimates for background and foreground scores and show that dynamically choosing kernel variances in our kernel estimates at each individual pixel can significantly improve results. We give a heuristic method for selectively applying the adaptive kernel calculations which is nearly as accurate as the full procedure but runs much faster. We combine these modeling improvements with recently developed complex features [4] and show significant improvements on a standard backgrounding benchmark. Manjunath Narayana, Allen R. Hanson, Erik G. Learned-Miller |
CVPR | 1 |
| 2007 | A Bayesian algorithm for tracking multiple moving objects in outdoor surveillance videoabstractReliable tracking of multiple moving objects in video is an interesting challenge, made difficult in real-world video by various sources of noise and uncertainty. We propose a Bayesian approach to find correspondences between moving objects over frames. By using color values and position information of the moving objects as observations, we probabilistically assign tracks to those objects. We allow for tracks to be lost and then recovered when they resurface. The probabilistic assignment method, along with the ability to recover lost tracks, adds robustness to the tracking system. We present results that show that the Bayesian method performs well in difficult tracking cases and compare the probabilistic results to a Euclidean distance based method. Manjunath Narayana, Donna Haverkamp |
CVPR | 1 |