ArticleJournal of imaging2024
Data Fusion of RGB and Depth Data with Image Enhancement.
Article in Journal of imaging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spectrometer-free time-division multiplexed NIR time-of-flight vision system for visually similar material recognition.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Vision-Based Artificial Intelligence for Adaptive Peen Forming: Sensing Architectures, Learning Models, and Closed-Loop Smart Manufacturing.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Since 3D sensors became popular, imaged depth data are easier to obtain in the consumer sector. In applications such as defect localization on industrial objects or mass/volume estimation, precise depth data is important and, thus, benefits from the usage of multiple information sources. However, a combination of RGB images and depth images can not only improve our understanding of objects, capacitating one to gain more information about objects but also enhance data quality. Combining different camera systems using data fusion can enable higher quality data since disadvantages can be compensated. Data fusion itself consists of data preparation and data registration. A challenge in data fusion is the different resolutions of sensors. Therefore, up- and downsampling algorithms are needed. This paper compares multiple up- and downsampling methods, such as different direct interpolation methods, joint bilateral upsampling (JBU), and Markov random fields (MRFs), in terms of their potential to create RGB-D images and improve the quality of depth information. In contrast to the literature in which imaging systems are adjusted to acquire the data of the same section simultaneously, the laboratory setup in this study was based on conveyor-based optical sorting processes, and therefore, the data were acquired at different time periods and different spatial locations. Data assignment and data cropping were necessary. In order to evaluate the results, root mean square error (RMSE), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), correlation (CORR), universal quality index (UQI), and the contour offset are monitored. With JBU outperforming the other upsampling methods, achieving a meanRMSE = 25.22, mean SNR = 32.80, mean CORR = 0.99, and mean UQI = 0.97.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.