International Journal of Computer Vision

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 225–246

Motion from point matches: Multiplicity of solutions

  • Olivier D. Faugeras
  • Steve Maybank
Article

Abstract

In this paper, we study the multiplicity of solutions of the motion problem. Given n point matches between two frames, how many solutions are there to the motion problem? We show that the maximum number of solutions is 10 when 5 point matches are available. This settles a question that has been around in the computer vision community for a while. We follow two tracks.
  • • The first one attempts to recover the motion parameters by studying the essential matrix and has been followed by a number of researchers in the field. A natural extension of this is to use algebraic geometry to characterize the set of possible essential matrixes. We present some new results based on this approach.

  • • The second question, based on projective geometry, dates from the previous century.

We show that the two approaches are compatible and yield the same result.

We then describe a computer implementation of the second approach that uses MAPLE, a language for symbolic computation. The program allows us to compute exactly the solutions for any configuration of 5 points. Some experiments are described.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    M. Chasles, “Question No. 296,” Nouv. Ann. Math. 14: 50, 1855.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Demazure, Sur deux problemes de reconstruction, Technical Report No. 882, INRIA, 1988.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    G.H.Golub and C.F.VanLoan, Matrix Computations. Johns Hopking University Press: Baltimore, 1983.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    O.Hesse, “Die cubische Gleichung, von welcher die Losung des Problems der Homographie von M. Chasles abhangt,” J. reine angew. Math. 62: 188–192, 1863.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    B.K.P.Horn, “Closed-form solution of absolute orientation using unit quaternions,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. 4(4): 629–642, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    E.Kruppa, “Zur Ermittlung eines Objektes aus zwei Perspektiven mit innerer Orientierung, Sitz.-Ber. Akad. Wiss., Wien, math. naturw. Kl. Abt. IIa., 122: 1939–1948, 1913.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    H.C.Longuet-Higgins, “A computer algorithm for reconstructing a scene from two perspective projections,” Nature 293: 133–135, 1981.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H.C.Longuet-Higgins, “Configurations that defeat the eight-point algorithm. Mental Processes: Studies in Cognitive Science, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, pp. 305–307, 1987.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H.C. Longuet-Higgins, “Multiple interpretations of a pair of images of a surface,” Proc. Roy. Soc. London A., 418, 1988.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S.J.Maybank, “The angular velocity associated with the optical flow field due to a rigid moving body,” Proc. Roy. Soc. London A. 401: 317–326, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    S.J. Maybank, “A theoretical study of optical flow.” Ph.D. thesis, University of London, Birkbeck College, November 1987.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J.G.Semple and G.T.Kneebone, Algebraic Projective Geometry. Clarendon Press: Oxford. 1952. Reprinted 1979.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    J.G.Semple and L.Roth, Introduction to Algebraic Geometry. Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1949. Reprinted 1987.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    R.Sturm, “Das Problem der Projektivitat und seine Anwendung auf die Flachen zweiten Grades,” Math. Ann. 1: 533–574, 1869.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olivier D. Faugeras
    • 1
  • Steve Maybank
    • 2
  1. 1.INRIAValbonne CedexFrance
  2. 2.Hirst Research CenterWembleyEngland

Personalised recommendations