Rethinking Inductive Biases for Surface Normal Estimation
About
Despite the growing demand for accurate surface normal estimation models, existing methods use general-purpose dense prediction models, adopting the same inductive biases as other tasks. In this paper, we discuss the inductive biases needed for surface normal estimation and propose to (1) utilize the per-pixel ray direction and (2) encode the relationship between neighboring surface normals by learning their relative rotation. The proposed method can generate crisp - yet, piecewise smooth - predictions for challenging in-the-wild images of arbitrary resolution and aspect ratio. Compared to a recent ViT-based state-of-the-art model, our method shows a stronger generalization ability, despite being trained on an orders of magnitude smaller dataset. The code is available at https://github.com/baegwangbin/DSINE.
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surface Normal Prediction | NYU V2 | Mean Error16.4 | 100 | |
| Surface Normal Estimation | NYU V2 | -- | 23 | |
| Surface Normal Estimation | ScanNet Normal Benchmark (test) | Angle Error Threshold (11.25°)61 | 18 | |
| Transparent object normal estimation | ClearGrasp Synthetic (test) | Mean Angular Error25.7 | 13 | |
| Transparent object normal estimation | ClearPose Real-World (test) | Mean Angular Error40.2 | 13 | |
| Transparent object normal estimation | TransNormal Synthetic (test) | Mean Angular Error13.2 | 13 | |
| Video Surface Normal Estimation | Sintel | Mean Angular Error34.9 | 12 | |
| Surface Normal Estimation | DIODE | Mean Angle Error19.9 | 8 | |
| Surface Normal Estimation | iBIMS-1 | MAE17.1 | 7 | |
| Surface Normal Estimation | OASIS | Mean Angular Error24.4 | 7 |