Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Shobhit Verma

dblp:224/0704 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2018
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1

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
1 paper
3D vision · 100%

Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computer vision › 3D vision
3d reconstruction
0.312018
Reconstructing scenes with mirror and glass surfaces · ACM Trans. Graph. 2018
Computer vision › 3D vision › 3d reconstruction › surface reconstruction
planar surface reconstruction
0.312018
Reconstructing scenes with mirror and glass surfaces · ACM Trans. Graph. 2018
Computer vision › 3D vision › 3d reconstruction › non-lambertian surface reconstruction
reflective surface reconstruction
0.312018
Reconstructing scenes with mirror and glass surfaces · ACM Trans. Graph. 2018

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

plane segmentation · 0.3apriltag fiducial · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2018 Reconstructing scenes with mirror and glass surfaces
abstract
Planar reflective surfaces such as glass and mirrors are notoriously hard to reconstruct for most current 3D scanning techniques. When treated naïvely, they introduce duplicate scene structures, effectively destroying the reconstruction altogether. Our key insight is that an easy to identify structure attached to the scanner---in our case an AprilTag---can yield reliable information about the existence and the geometry of glass and mirror surfaces in a scene. We introduce a fully automatic pipeline that allows us to reconstruct the geometry and extent of planar glass and mirror surfaces while being able to distinguish between the two. Furthermore, our system can automatically segment observations of multiple reflective surfaces in a scene based on their estimated planes and locations. In the proposed setup, minimal additional hardware is needed to create high-quality results. We demonstrate this using reconstructions of several scenes with a variety of real mirrors and glass.
Thomas Whelan, Michael Goesele, Steven Lovegrove, Julian Straub, Simon Green, Richard Szeliski, Steven Butterfield, Shobhit Verma, Richard A. Newcombe
ACM Trans. Graph.8