ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Fringe-Based Structured-Light 3D Reconstruction: Principles, Projection Technologies, and Deep Learning Integration.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phase-Domain Peak-Based Correspondence Extraction for Robust Structured-Light Imaging.Journal of imaging · 2026Article
- A Comprehensive Review of Optical Metrology and Perception Technologies.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- A Review of Optical Metrology Techniques for Advanced Manufacturing Applications.Micromachines · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Structured-light 3D reconstruction is an active measurement technique that extracts spatial geometric information of objects by projecting fringe patterns and analyzing their distortions. It has been widely applied in industrial inspection, cultural heritage digitization, virtual reality, and other related fields. This review presents a comprehensive analysis of mainstream fringe-based reconstruction methods, including Fringe Projection Profilometry (FPP) for diffuse surfaces and Phase Measuring Deflectometry (PMD) for specular surfaces. While existing reviews typically focus on individual techniques or specific applications, they often lack a systematic comparison between these two major approaches. In particular, the influence of different projection schemes such as Digital Light Processing (DLP) and MEMS scanning mirror-based laser scanning on system performance has not yet been fully clarified. To fill this gap, the review analyzes and compares FPP and PMD with respect to measurement principles, system implementation, calibration and modeling strategies, error control mechanisms, and integration with deep learning methods. Special focus is placed on the potential of MEMS projection technology in achieving lightweight and high-dynamic-range measurement scenarios, as well as the emerging role of deep learning in enhancing phase retrieval and 3D reconstruction accuracy. This review concludes by identifying key technical challenges and offering insights into future research directions in system modeling, intelligent reconstruction, and comprehensive performance evaluation.
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.