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

Huub Heijnen

dblp:177/3719 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none

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

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 first-authorGraphics, 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
2 papers
3D vision · 70% Legged, aerial and field robots · 23% Transfer learning and domain adaptation · 7%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computer vision › 3D vision
feature matching
0.412019
SOSNet: Second Order Similarity Regularization for Local Descriptor Learning · CVPR 2019
Computer vision › 3D vision › local feature descriptor
local descriptor learning
0.412019
SOSNet: Second Order Similarity Regularization for Local Descriptor Learning · CVPR 2019
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots › bio-inspired robot
evolutionary robotics
0.312017
A testbed that evolves hexapod controllers in hardware · ICRA 2017
Computer vision › 3D vision
structure from motion
0.112019
SOSNet: Second Order Similarity Regularization for Local Descriptor Learning · CVPR 2019
Machine learning › Transfer learning and domain adaptation
sim-to-real transfer
0.112017
A testbed that evolves hexapod controllers in hardware · ICRA 2017

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

von mises-fischer distribution · 0.4second order similarity · 0.4multi-objective evolutionary algorithm · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 SOSNet: Second Order Similarity Regularization for Local Descriptor Learning
abstract
Despite the fact that Second Order Similarity (SOS) has been used with significant success in tasks such as graph matching and clustering, it has not been exploited for learning local descriptors. In this work, we explore the potential of \sos in the field of descriptor learning by building upon the intuition that a positive pair of matching points should exhibit similar distances with respect to other points in the embedding space. Thus, we propose a novel regularization term, named Second Order Similarity Regularization (SOSR), that follows this principle. By incorporating SOSR into training, our learned descriptor achieves state-of-the-art performance on several challenging benchmarks containing distinct tasks ranging from local patch retrieval to structure from motion. Furthermore, by designing a von Mises-Fischer distribution based evaluation method, we link the utilization of the descriptor space to the matching performance, thus demonstrating the effectiveness of our proposed SOSR. Extensive experimental results, empirical evidence, and in-depth analysis are provided, indicating that SOSR can significantly boost the matching performance of the learned descriptor.
Yurun Tian, Xin Yu 0002, Bin Fan 0001, Fuchao Wu, Huub Heijnen, Vassileios Balntas
CVPR5
2017 A testbed that evolves hexapod controllers in hardware
abstract
Evolutionary algorithms have previously shown promise in generating controllers for legged robots. Multiple evaluations across many evolutionary generations are typically required - simulators are frequently used to accommodate this. However, performance degradation is frequently observed when transferring controllers from simulation to reality due to inconsistencies between the two. In this paper we demonstrate a testbed that permits repeated, direct evolution of hexapod controllers as a closed-loop system. The testbed uses a two-stage evolutionary process. In stage 1, a multi-objective evolutionary algorithm spreads a population of controllers across a space of desirable criteria. The second stage allows for specific criteria to be selected for on a per-mission basis, with promising initial controller parameters taken from the first stage. As the optimisation occurs directly on the robot, performance is guaranteed. Furthermore, controllers can be made specific to irregularities in e.g., motor wear, and robot mass distribution, creating controllers that are sensitive to the hardware state of the individual robot.
Huub Heijnen, Gerard David Howard, Navinda Kottege
ICRA1