Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42506142›Full record

ArticleJournal of imaging2026

Probabilistic Camera Distortion Correction Using Deep Gaussian Processes.

Ivan De Boi, Rhys G Evans, Stuti Pathak, Thomas De Kerf, Marnix Van Soom, Sam Van der Jeught, Helder Araújo, Rudi Penne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ivan De BoiInViLab, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 179, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-3060-262X
Rhys G EvansInViLab, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 179, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0001-2958-5052
Stuti PathakInViLab, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 179, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0001-8973-4822
Thomas De KerfInViLab, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 179, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-9368-3060
Marnix Van SoomAI Lab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1935-1770
Sam Van der JeughtInViLab, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 179, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-4184-6147
Helder AraújoInstitute of Systems and Robotics, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (DEEC), University of Coimbra, Rua Sílvio Lima, 3030-290 Coimbra, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-9544-424X
Rudi PenneInViLab, University of Antwerp, Groenenborgerlaan 179, 2020 Antwerp, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-0921-1950

Funding

Research Foundation - Flanders 1217125NResearch Foundation - Flanders 12A6126N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate lens distortion correction is important for calibration, registration, image stitching, and 3D reconstruction, especially in low-data device-specific settings where disposable or specialised cameras cannot provide large calibration datasets. We address distortion correction for cameras with highly irregular or non-stationary distortion fields, where fixed polynomial models and generic learning-based rectification methods can struggle. We propose a framework based on Deep Gaussian Processes (DGPs) to model the non-linear mapping required for undistortion. The key motivation is that conventional single-layer GPs with stationary kernels must use one global notion of smoothness, whereas DGPs can represent spatially varying behaviour through composed latent mappings while preserving per-pixel predictive uncertainty. This uncertainty can be used to identify or downweight unreliable corrected regions in downstream tasks. We evaluate the method on three real camera datasets with increasing distortion complexity. The full structured acquisitions contain 512 horizontal and 512 vertical line images per camera. These are not thousands of natural calibration images, but they yield up to 29,532, 11,311, and 31,686 detected intersection correspondences for the RPI, Theta, and Pillcam datasets, respectively. This distinction is important for cameras where acquiring many independent images is impractical. The results are assessed using qualitative rectification, uncertainty maps, normalised collinearity errors, and total training time. Polynomial calibration remains strongest for the regular radial RPI distortion, while DGP and DGP2 models show lower normalised collinearity-error distributions than the standard GP and lightweight MLP baselines on the more distorted Theta and Pillcam datasets. For the full datasets, total DGP/DGP2 training times ranged from 2383.50 s to 10092.50 s, reflecting the additional computational cost of probabilistic non-stationary modelling.

Indexed as

camera calibrationcamera distortion correctiondeep gaussian processesendoscopyfisheyelens distortion removalwide-angle

Identifiers

PMID42506142
PMCPMC13413116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.