Andreas Geiger (MPI Tübingen) | Philip Lenz (KIT) | Christoph Stiller (KIT) | Raquel Urtasun (University of Toronto)

Optical Flow Evaluation 2015


The stereo 2015 / flow 2015 / scene flow 2015 benchmark consists of 200 training scenes and 200 test scenes (4 color images per scene, saved in loss less png format). Compared to the stereo 2012 and flow 2012 benchmarks, it comprises dynamic scenes for which the ground truth has been established in a semi-automatic process. Our evaluation server computes the percentage of bad pixels averaged over all ground truth pixels of all 200 test images. For this benchmark, we consider a pixel to be correctly estimated if the disparity or flow end-point error is <3px or <5% (for scene flow this criterion needs to be fulfilled for both disparity maps and the flow map). We require that all methods use the same parameter set for all test pairs. Our development kit provides details about the data format as well as MATLAB / C++ utility functions for reading and writing disparity maps and flow fields. More details can be found in Object Scene Flow for Autonomous Vehicles (CVPR 2015).

Our evaluation table ranks all methods according to the number of erroneous pixels. All methods providing less than 100 % density have been interpolated using simple background interpolation as explained in the corresponding header file in the development kit. Legend:

  • D1: Percentage of stereo disparity outliers in first frame
  • D2: Percentage of stereo disparity outliers in second frame
  • Fl: Percentage of optical flow outliers
  • SF: Percentage of scene flow outliers (=outliers in either D0, D1 or Fl)
  • bg: Percentage of outliers averaged only over background regions
  • fg: Percentage of outliers averaged only over foreground regions
  • all: Percentage of outliers averaged over all ground truth pixels


Note: On 13.03.2017 we have fixed several small errors in the flow (noc+occ) ground truth of the dynamic foreground objects and manually verified all images for correctness by warping them according to the ground truth. As a consequence, all error numbers have decreased slightly. Please download the devkit and the annotations with the improved ground truth for the training set again if you have downloaded the files prior to 13.03.2017 and consider reporting these new number in all future publications. The last leaderboards before these corrections can be found here (optical flow 2015) and here (scene flow 2015). The leaderboards for the KITTI 2015 stereo benchmarks did not change.

Additional information used by the methods
  • Stereo: Method uses left and right (stereo) images
  • Multiview: Method uses more than 2 temporally adjacent images
  • Motion stereo: Method uses epipolar geometry for computing optical flow
  • Additional training data: Use of additional data sources for training (see details)

Evaluation ground truth        Evaluation area

Method Setting Code Fl-bg Fl-fg Fl-all Density Runtime Environment
1 PSPO
This method uses stereo information.
 4.35 % 15.21 % 6.15 % 100.00 % 5 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
2 ISF
This method uses stereo information.
 5.40 % 10.29 % 6.22 % 100.00 % 10 min 1 core @ 3 Ghz (C/C++)
A. Behl, O. Jafari, S. Mustikovela, H. Alhaija, C. Rother and A. Geiger: Bounding Boxes, Segmentations and Object Coordinates: How Important is Recognition for 3D Scene Flow Estimation in Autonomous Driving Scenarios?. International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) 2017.
3 PRSM
This method uses stereo information.
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 code 5.33 % 13.40 % 6.68 % 100.00 % 300 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
C. Vogel, K. Schindler and S. Roth: 3D Scene Flow Estimation with a Piecewise Rigid Scene Model. ijcv 2015.
4 OSF+TC
This method uses stereo information.
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 5.76 % 13.31 % 7.02 % 100.00 % 50 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
M. Neoral and J. Šochman: Object Scene Flow with Temporal Consistency. 22nd Computer Vision Winter Workshop (CVWW) 2017.
5 SSF
This method uses stereo information.
 5.63 % 14.71 % 7.14 % 100.00 % 5 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
Z. Ren, D. Sun, J. Kautz and E. Sudderth: Cascaded Scene Flow Prediction using Semantic Segmentation. International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV) 2017.
6 EOSF
This method uses stereo information.
 5.41 % 15.96 % 7.16 % 100.00 % 10 min 1 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
7 SOSF
This method uses stereo information.
 5.42 % 17.24 % 7.39 % 100.00 % 55 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
8 OSF 2018
This method uses stereo information.
 code 5.38 % 17.61 % 7.41 % 100.00 % 390 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
M. Menze, C. Heipke and A. Geiger: Object Scene Flow. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (JPRS) 2018.
9 OSF
This method uses stereo information.
 code 5.62 % 18.92 % 7.83 % 100.00 % 50 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
M. Menze and A. Geiger: Object Scene Flow for Autonomous Vehicles. Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2015.
10 AugmentedFlowNetDCSS 8.36 % 9.62 % 8.57 % 100.00 % 0.07 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
11 DN-FN-CSS-I
This method uses stereo information.
 8.48 % 9.25 % 8.60 % 100.00 % 0.25 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
12 MFF
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 8.95 % 8.36 % 8.85 % 100.00 % 0.05 s NVIDIA Pascal Titan X (Python)
ECCV Submission #2305. .
13 LiteFlowNet code 9.66 % 7.99 % 9.38 % 100.00 % 0.09 s NVIDIA GTX 1080 (Python + C/C++)
T. Hui, X. Tang and C. Loy: LiteFlowNet: A Lightweight Convolutional Neural Network for Optical Flow Estimation. Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2018.
14 PWC-Net code 9.66 % 9.31 % 9.60 % 100.00 % 0.03 s NVIDIA Pascal Titan X
D. Sun, X. Yang, M. Liu and J. Kautz: PWC-Net: CNNs for Optical Flow Using Pyramid, Warping, and Cost Volume. CVPR 2018.
15 ContinualFlow_ROB
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 8.54 % 17.48 % 10.03 % 100.00 % 0.15 s GPU - NVidia 1080Ti
16 MirrorFlow code 8.93 % 17.07 % 10.29 % 100.00 % 11 min 4 core @ 2.2 Ghz (C/C++)
J. Hur and S. Roth: MirrorFlow: Exploiting Symmetries in Joint Optical Flow and Occlusion Estimation. ICCV 2017.
17 RIMM-SF
This method uses stereo information.
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 9.68 % 16.18 % 10.76 % 100.00 % 150 s 4 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
18 SS-SF
This method uses stereo information.
 8.17 % 25.20 % 11.00 % 100.00 % 3 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
19 SDF 8.61 % 23.01 % 11.01 % 100.00 % TBA 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
M. Bai*, W. Luo*, K. Kundu and R. Urtasun: Exploiting Semantic Information and Deep Matching for Optical Flow. ECCV 2016.
20 LFNet_ROB 11.18 % 10.20 % 11.01 % 100.00 % 0.0985 s NVIDIA 1080 (Python + C/C++)
21 UnFlow code 10.15 % 15.93 % 11.11 % 100.00 % 0.12 s GPU @ 1.5 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
S. Meister, J. Hur and S. Roth: UnFlow: Unsupervised Learning of Optical Flow with a Bidirectional Census Loss. AAAI 2018.
22 FSF+MS
This method uses stereo information.
This method makes use of the epipolar geometry.
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 8.48 % 25.43 % 11.30 % 100.00 % 2.7 s 4 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
T. Taniai, S. Sinha and Y. Sato: Fast Multi-frame Stereo Scene Flow with Motion Segmentation. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR 2017) 2017.
23 CNNF+PMBP 10.08 % 18.56 % 11.49 % 100.00 % 45 min 1 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
F. Zhang and B. Wah: Fundamental Principles on Learning New Features for Effective Dense Matching. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing 2018.
24 PWC-Net_ROB code 11.22 % 13.69 % 11.63 % 100.00 % 0.03 s NVIDIA Pascal Titan X
D. Sun, X. Yang, M. Liu and J. Kautz: PWC-Net: CNNs for Optical Flow Using Pyramid, Warping, and Cost Volume. CVPR 2018.
25 SfM-PM
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 9.66 % 22.73 % 11.83 % 100.00 % 69 s 3 cores @ 3.6 Ghz (C/C++)
D. Maurer, N. Marniok, B. Goldluecke and A. Bruhn: Structure-from-Motion-Aware PatchMatch for Adaptive Optical Flow Estimation. ECCV 2018.
26 MR-Flow
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 code 10.13 % 22.51 % 12.19 % 100.00 % 8 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
J. Wulff, L. Sevilla-Lara and M. Black: Optical Flow in Mostly Rigid Scenes. IEEE Conf. on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2017.
27 SceneFFields
This method uses stereo information.
 10.58 % 24.41 % 12.88 % 100.00 % 65 s 4 cores @ 3.7 Ghz (C/C++)
R. Schuster, O. Wasenmüller, G. Kuschk, C. Bailer and D. Stricker: SceneFlowFields: Dense Interpolation of Sparse Scene Flow Correspondences. IEEE Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision (WACV) 2018.
28 SegFlow-CNN 13.08 % 12.18 % 12.93 % 100.00 % 16.8s GPU+CPU 4 cores @ >3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
29 CSF
This method uses stereo information.
 10.40 % 25.78 % 12.96 % 100.00 % 80 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
Z. Lv, C. Beall, P. Alcantarilla, F. Li, Z. Kira and F. Dellaert: A Continuous Optimization Approach for Efficient and Accurate Scene Flow. European Conf. on Computer Vision (ECCV) 2016.
30 PR-Sceneflow
This method uses stereo information.
 code 11.73 % 24.33 % 13.83 % 100.00 % 150 s 4 core @ 3.0 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
C. Vogel, K. Schindler and S. Roth: Piecewise Rigid Scene Flow. ICCV 2013.
31 DCFlow code 13.10 % 23.70 % 14.86 % 100.00 % 8.6 s GPU @ 3.0 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
J. Xu, R. Ranftl and V. Koltun: Accurate Optical Flow via Direct Cost Volume Processing. CVPR 2017.
32 ProFlow
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 13.86 % 20.91 % 15.04 % 100.00 % 112 s GPU+CPU @ 3.6 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
D. Maurer and A. Bruhn: ProFlow: Learning to Predict Optical Flow. BMVC 2018.
33 FlowFields++ code 14.82 % 17.77 % 15.31 % 100.00 % 29 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
R. Schuster, C. Bailer, O. Wasenmüller and D. Stricker: FlowFields++: Accurate Optical Flow Correspondences Meet Robust Interpolation. International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP) 2018.
34 ProFlow_ROB
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 14.15 % 21.82 % 15.42 % 100.00 % 112 s GPU+CPU @ 3.6 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
D. Maurer and A. Bruhn: ProFlow: Learning to Predict Optical Flow. BMVC 2018.
35 Deep-EIP 13.40 % 26.51 % 15.58 % 100.00 % 0.2 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
36 FF++_ROB 15.32 % 19.27 % 15.97 % 100.00 % 29 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
R. Schuster, C. Bailer, O. Wasenmüller and D. Stricker: FlowFields++: Accurate Optical Flow Correspondences Meet Robust Interpolation. International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP) 2018.
37 SOF code 14.63 % 22.83 % 15.99 % 100.00 % 6 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab)
L. Sevilla-Lara, D. Sun, V. Jampani and M. Black: Optical Flow with Semantic Segmentation and Localized Layers. CVPR 2016.
38 DIP-Flow-DF
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 14.93 % 23.37 % 16.33 % 100.00 % 104s 2 cores @ 3.6 Ghz (C/C++)
D. Maurer, M. Stoll and A. Bruhn: Directional Priors for Multi-Frame Optical Flow. BMVC 2018.
39 JFS
This method makes use of the epipolar geometry.
 15.90 % 19.31 % 16.47 % 100.00 % 13 min 1 core @ 3.2 Ghz (C/C++)
J. Hur and S. Roth: Joint Optical Flow and Temporally Consistent Semantic Segmentation. ECCV Workshops 2016.
40 DF+OIR 15.11 % 23.45 % 16.50 % 100.00 % 3 min 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
D. Maurer, M. Stoll and A. Bruhn: Order-Adaptive and Illumination Aware Variational Optical Flow Refinement. BMVC 2017.
41 ResPWCR_ROB code 16.63 % 16.18 % 16.55 % 100.00 % 0.2 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
42 SPS+FF++
This method uses stereo information.
 15.91 % 20.27 % 16.64 % 100.00 % 36 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
43 DIP-Flow-CPM
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 15.57 % 23.84 % 16.95 % 100.00 % 52 s 2 core @ 3.6 Ghz (C/C++)
D. Maurer, M. Stoll and A. Bruhn: Directional Priors for Multi-Frame Optical Flow. BMVC 2018.
44 ImpPB+SPCI code 17.25 % 20.44 % 17.78 % 100.00 % 60 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
T. Schuster, L. Wolf and D. Gadot: Optical Flow Requires Multiple Strategies (but only one network). CVPR 2017.
45 unscene
This method uses stereo information.
 16.93 % 23.34 % 18.00 % 100.00 % 0.08 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
46 AugFNG_ROB 19.77 % 9.95 % 18.14 % 100.00 % 0.10 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
47 PCOF-LDOF
This method uses stereo information.
 14.34 % 38.32 % 18.33 % 100.00 % 50 s 1 core @ 3.0 Ghz (C/C++)
M. Derome, A. Plyer, M. Sanfourche and G. Le Besnerais: A Prediction-Correction Approach for Real-Time Optical Flow Computation Using Stereo. German Conference on Pattern Recognition 2016.
48 test2 18.28 % 20.39 % 18.63 % 100.00 % 30 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
49 test 18.28 % 20.39 % 18.63 % 100.00 % 1 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
50 SegFlow 18.03 % 21.77 % 18.66 % 100.00 % 4.15s 4 cores @ >3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
. Anonymous: SegFlow. .
51 FlowFieldCNN 18.33 % 20.42 % 18.68 % 100.00 % 23 s GPU/CPU 4 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
C. Bailer, K. Varanasi and D. Stricker: CNN-based Patch Matching for Optical Flow with Thresholded Hinge Embedding Loss. CVPR 2017.
52 RicFlow 18.73 % 19.09 % 18.79 % 100.00 % 5 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
Y. Hu, Y. Li and R. Song: Robust Interpolation of Correspondences for Large Displacement Optical Flow. CVPR 2017.
53 EAI-Flow 18.05 % 26.23 % 19.41 % 100.00 % 4.5 s 2 cores @ 3.0 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
54 PGM-G 18.90 % 23.43 % 19.66 % 100.00 % 5.05 s 1 core @ 3.1 Ghz (C/C++)
Y. Li: Pyramidal Gradient Matching for Optical Flow Estimation. CoRR 2017.
55 BDPPM 19.25 % 22.21 % 19.74 % 100.00 % 3 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
56 FlowFields+ 19.51 % 21.26 % 19.80 % 100.00 % 28s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
C. Bailer, B. Taetz and D. Stricker: Flow Fields: Dense Correspondence Fields for Highly Accurate Large Displacement Optical Flow Estimation. .
57 PMPM code 19.36 % 22.19 % 19.83 % 100.00 % 1.1 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
58 CPM2
This method uses stereo information.
 code 19.22 % 23.37 % 19.91 % 100.00 % 3 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
59 t3 19.80 % 22.13 % 20.18 % 100.00 % 30 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
60 Devon 19.43 % 26.59 % 20.62 % 100.00 % 0.01 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
61 PatchBatch code 19.98 % 26.50 % 21.07 % 100.00 % 50 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
D. Gadot and L. Wolf: PatchBatch: a Batch Augmented Loss for Optical Flow. The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2016.
62 DDF code 20.36 % 25.19 % 21.17 % 100.00 % ~1 min GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
F. G\"uney and A. Geiger: Deep Discrete Flow. Asian Conference on Computer Vision (ACCV) 2016.
63 DCS 20.91 % 24.20 % 21.46 % 100.00 % 2 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
64 SODA-Flow 20.01 % 29.14 % 21.53 % 100.00 % 96 s 2 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
D. Maurer, M. Stoll, S. Volz, P. Gairing and A. Bruhn: A Comparison of Isotropic and Anisotropic Second Order Regularisers for Optical Flow. SSVM 2017.
65 DiscreteFlow code 21.53 % 21.76 % 21.57 % 100.00 % 3 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
M. Menze, C. Heipke and A. Geiger: Discrete Optimization for Optical Flow. German Conference on Pattern Recognition (GCPR) 2015.
66 SGM+SF
This method uses stereo information.
 20.91 % 25.50 % 21.67 % 100.00 % 45 min 16 core @ 3.2 Ghz (C/C++)
H. Hirschmüller: Stereo Processing by Semiglobal Matching and Mutual Information. PAMI 2008.
M. Hornacek, A. Fitzgibbon and C. Rother: SphereFlow: 6 DoF Scene Flow from RGB-D Pairs. CVPR 2014.
67 OAR-Flow 20.62 % 27.67 % 21.79 % 100.00 % 100 s 2 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
D. Maurer, M. Stoll and A. Bruhn: Order-Adaptive Regularisation for Variational Optical Flow: Global, Local and in Between. SSVM 2017.
68 CPM-Flow code 22.32 % 22.81 % 22.40 % 100.00 % 4.2 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
Y. Hu, R. Song and Y. Li: Efficient Coarse-to-Fine PatchMatch for Large Displacement Optical Flow. CVPR 2016.
69 PCOF + ACTF
This method uses stereo information.
 14.89 % 60.15 % 22.43 % 100.00 % 0.08 s GPU @ 2.0 Ghz (C/C++)
M. Derome, A. Plyer, M. Sanfourche and G. Le Besnerais: A Prediction-Correction Approach for Real-Time Optical Flow Computation Using Stereo. German Conference on Pattern Recognition 2016.
70 IntrpNt-df code 22.15 % 26.03 % 22.80 % 100.00 % 3 min GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
S. Zweig and L. Wolf: InterpoNet, a Brain Inspired Neural Network for Optical Flow Dense Interpolation. The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2017.
71 SGM&FlowFie+
This method uses stereo information.
 22.83 % 22.75 % 22.82 % 81.24 % 29 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
R. Schuster, C. Bailer, O. Wasenmüller and D. Stricker: Combining Stereo Disparity and Optical Flow for Basic Scene Flow. Commercial Vehicle Technology Symposium (CVTS) 2018.
72 Back2FutureFlow
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 22.67 % 24.27 % 22.94 % 100.00 % 0.12 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (LUA/Torch)
J. Janai, F. Güney, A. Ranjan, M. Black and A. Geiger: Unsupervised Learning of Multi-Frame Optical Flow with Occlusions. Proc. of the European Conf. on Computer Vision (ECCV) 2018.
73 ContFusion 21.93 % 28.75 % 23.06 % 100.00 % 7 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
74 MotionSLIC
This method makes use of the epipolar geometry.
 code 14.86 % 64.44 % 23.11 % 100.00 % 30 s 4 cores @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
K. Yamaguchi, D. McAllester and R. Urtasun: Robust Monocular Epipolar Flow Estimation. CVPR 2013.
75 IntrpNt-cpm code 22.51 % 26.54 % 23.18 % 100.00 % 5.6 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
S. Zweig and L. Wolf: InterpoNet, a Brain Inspired Neural Network for Optical Flow Dense Interpolation. The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2017.
76 COF+AnisoTGV 22.32 % 28.33 % 23.32 % 100.00 % 90 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
77 FullFlow 23.09 % 24.79 % 23.37 % 100.00 % 4 min 4 cores @ >3.5 Ghz (Matlab and C++)
Q. Chen and V. Koltun: Full Flow: Optical Flow Estimation By Global Optimization over Regular Grids. CVPR 2016.
78 HiLM code 23.73 % 21.79 % 23.41 % 100.00 % 8 sec P6000 (C/C++)
M. Fathy, Q. Tran, M. Zia, P. Vernaza and M. Chandraker: Hierarchical Metric Learning and Matching for 2D and 3D Geometric Correspondences. European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV) 2018.
79 IntrpNt-dm code 23.46 % 26.27 % 23.93 % 100.00 % 15 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
S. Zweig and L. Wolf: InterpoNet, a Brain Inspired Neural Network for Optical Flow Dense Interpolation. The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) 2017.
80 SPM-BP 24.06 % 24.97 % 24.21 % 100.00 % 10 s 2 cores @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
Y. Li, D. Min, M. Brown, M. Do and J. Lu: SPM-BP: Sped-up PatchMatch Belief Propagation for Continuous MRFs. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision 2015.
81 Spy-PM 24.36 % 24.68 % 24.41 % 100.00 % 5 s 1 core @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
82 RecSPy+ 22.54 % 34.07 % 24.46 % 100.00 % 0.16 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
83 sef 24.66 % 25.24 % 24.75 % 100.00 % 4.25 s 4 cores @ >3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
84 PPM code 25.87 % 23.67 % 25.50 % 100.00 % 17.3 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/Chttps://github.c++)
F. Kuang: PatchMatch algorithms for motion estimation and stereo reconstruction. 2017.
85 IHBPFlow
This method makes use of multiple (>2) views.
 25.64 % 28.66 % 26.14 % 100.00 % 48 s 4 cores @ 3.0 Ghz (C/C++)
86 3DFlow 25.56 % 29.33 % 26.19 % 100.00 % 480 s 4 cores @ >3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
J. Chen, Z. Cai, J. Lai and y. Xiaohua Xie: . .
87 EpicFlow code 25.81 % 28.69 % 26.29 % 100.00 % 15 s 1 core @ >3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
J. Revaud, P. Weinzaepfel, Z. Harchaoui and C. Schmid: EpicFlow: Edge-Preserving Interpolation of Correspondences for Optical Flow. CVPR 2015 - IEEE Conference on Computer Vision \& Pattern Recognition 2015.
88 IPFlow 25.87 % 37.37 % 27.79 % 100.00 % 1.2 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
89 DeepFlow code 27.96 % 31.06 % 28.48 % 100.00 % 17 s 1 core @ >3.5 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
P. Weinzaepfel, J. Revaud, Z. Harchaoui and C. Schmid: DeepFlow: Large displacement optical flow with deep matching. IEEE Intenational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) 2013.
90 DeGraF-Flow 28.78 % 29.69 % 28.94 % 100.00 % 3.2 s 4 cores @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
91 CPNFlow-occ 31.05 % 27.16 % 30.40 % 100.00 % 0.1 s GPU @ 1.5 Ghz (Python)
92 IIOF-NLDP 30.23 % 32.44 % 30.60 % 100.00 % 350 s 4 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (Matlab + C/C++)
D. Trinh, W. Blondel and C. Daul: A General Form of Illumination- Invariant Descriptors in Variational Optical Flow Estimation. IEEE Int. Conf. on Image Processing (ICIP) 2017.
93 DMF_ROB code 30.74 % 30.07 % 30.63 % 100.00 % 150 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
P. Weinzaepfel, J. Revaud, Z. Harchaoui and C. Schmid: DeepFlow: Large displacement optical flow with deep matching. ICCV - IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision 2013.
94 CPNFlow 32.57 % 22.36 % 30.87 % 100.00 % 0.1 s GPU @ 1.5 Ghz (Python)
95 unsup flow 30.73 % 33.38 % 31.17 % 100.00 % 0.08 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python + C/C++)
96 GeoFlow 32.49 % 25.73 % 31.36 % 100.00 % 8 s 2 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
97 WRT 33.39 % 26.79 % 32.29 % 100.00 % 9 s 2 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
98 WCT 34.01 % 27.48 % 32.92 % 100.00 % 9 s 2 cores @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
99 SPyNet code 33.36 % 43.62 % 35.07 % 100.00 % 0.16 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
A. Ranjan and M. Black: Optical Flow Estimation using a Spatial Pyramid Network. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition 2017.
100 SGM+C+NL
This method uses stereo information.
 code 34.24 % 42.46 % 35.61 % 93.83 % 4.5 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
H. Hirschmüller: Stereo Processing by Semiglobal Matching and Mutual Information. PAMI 2008.
D. Sun, S. Roth and M. Black: A Quantitative Analysis of Current Practices in Optical Flow Estimation and the Principles Behind Them. IJCV 2013.
101 PF 36.23 % 34.13 % 35.88 % 100.00 % 0.08 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
102 DWBSF
This method uses stereo information.
 40.74 % 31.16 % 39.14 % 100.00 % 7 min 4 cores @ 3.5 Ghz (C/C++)
C. Richardt, H. Kim, L. Valgaerts and C. Theobalt: Dense Wide-Baseline Scene Flow From Two Handheld Video Cameras. 3DV 2016.
103 SGM+LDOF
This method uses stereo information.
 code 40.81 % 31.92 % 39.33 % 95.89 % 86 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
H. Hirschmüller: Stereo Processing by Semiglobal Matching and Mutual Information. PAMI 2008.
T. Brox and J. Malik: Large Displacement Optical Flow: Descriptor Matching in Variational Motion Estimation. PAMI 2011.
104 HS code 39.90 % 51.39 % 41.81 % 100.00 % 2.6 min 1 core @ 3.0 Ghz (Matlab)
D. Sun, S. Roth and M. Black: A Quantitative Analysis of Current Practices in Optical Flow Estimation and The Principles Behind Them. 2014.
105 AC 44.13 % 42.94 % 43.93 % 100.00 % 0.1 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
106 WOLF_ROB 42.58 % 53.31 % 44.36 % 100.00 % 0.02 s GPU @ 2.5 Ghz (Python)
107 GCSF
This method uses stereo information.
 code 47.38 % 41.50 % 46.40 % 100.00 % 2.4 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
J. Cech, J. Sanchez-Riera and R. Horaud: Scene Flow Estimation by growing Correspondence Seeds. CVPR 2011.
108 DB-TV-L1 code 47.52 % 48.27 % 47.64 % 100.00 % 16 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab)
C. Zach, T. Pock and H. Bischof: A Duality Based Approach for Realtime TV- L1 Optical Flow. DAGM 2007.
109 VSF
This method uses stereo information.
 code 50.06 % 45.40 % 49.28 % 100.00 % 125 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
F. Huguet and F. Devernay: A Variational Method for Scene Flow Estimation from Stereo Sequences. ICCV 2007.
110 HAOF code 49.89 % 50.74 % 50.04 % 100.00 % 16.2 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
T. Brox, A. Bruhn, N. Papenberg and J. Weickert: High accuracy optical flow estimation based on a theory for warping. ECCV 2004.
111 SSF 51.61 % 48.39 % 51.07 % 100.00 % 200 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
ERROR: Wrong syntax in BIBTEX file.
112 TVL1_ROB code 51.15 % 51.12 % 51.14 % 100.00 % 3 s 4 cores @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
J. Sánchez Pérez, E. Meinhardt-Llopis and G. Facciolo: TV-L1 Optical Flow Estimation. Image Processing On Line 2013.
113 PolyExpand 52.00 % 58.56 % 53.09 % 100.00 % 1 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
G. Farneback: Two-Frame Motion Estimation Based on Polynomial Expansion. SCIA 2003.
114 Weberflow 55.04 % 79.44 % 59.10 % 100.00 % 9 s 2 cores @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab)
115 H+S_ROB code 68.22 % 76.49 % 69.60 % 100.00 % 8 s 4 cores @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
E. Meinhardt-Llopis, J. Sánchez Pérez and D. Kondermann: Horn-Schunck Optical Flow with a Multi-Scale Strategy. Image Processing On Line 2013.
116 Pyramid-LK code 71.84 % 76.82 % 72.67 % 100.00 % 1.5 min 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (Matlab)
J. Bouguet: Pyramidal implementation of the Lucas Kanade feature tracker. Intel 2000.
117 MEDIAN 87.37 % 92.80 % 88.27 % 99.86 % 0.01 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
118 AVERAGE 88.47 % 92.08 % 89.07 % 99.86 % 0.01 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
119 AVG_FLOW_ROB 89.48 % 92.60 % 90.00 % 100.00 % 0.01 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
120 UFT 96.10 % 97.07 % 96.26 % 1.55 % 0.8 s 1 core @ 2.5 Ghz (C/C++)
Table as LaTeX | Only published Methods




Related Datasets

  • HCI/Bosch Robust Vision Challenge: Optical flow and stereo vision challenge on high resolution imagery recorded at a high frame rate under diverse weather conditions (e.g., sunny, cloudy, rainy). The Robert Bosch AG provides a prize for the best performing method.
  • Image Sequence Analysis Test Site (EISATS): Synthetic image sequences with ground truth information provided by UoA and Daimler AG. Some of the images come with 3D range sensor information.
  • Middlebury Stereo Evaluation: The classic stereo evaluation benchmark, featuring four test images in version 2 of the benchmark, with very accurate ground truth from a structured light system. 38 image pairs are provided in total.
  • Daimler Stereo Dataset: Stereo bad weather highway scenes with partial ground truth for freespace
  • Make3D Range Image Data: Images with small-resolution ground truth used to learn and evaluate depth from single monocular images.
  • Lubor Ladicky's Stereo Dataset: Stereo Images with manually labeled ground truth based on polygonal areas.
  • Middlebury Optical Flow Evaluation: The classic optical flow evaluation benchmark, featuring eight test images, with very accurate ground truth from a shape from UV light pattern system. 24 image pairs are provided in total.

Citation

When using this dataset in your research, we will be happy if you cite us:
@ARTICLE{Menze2018JPRS,
  author = {Moritz Menze and Christian Heipke and Andreas Geiger},
  title = {Object Scene Flow},
  journal = {ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (JPRS)},
  year = {2018}
}
@INPROCEEDINGS{Menze2015ISA,
  author = {Moritz Menze and Christian Heipke and Andreas Geiger},
  title = {Joint 3D Estimation of Vehicles and Scene Flow},
  booktitle = {ISPRS Workshop on Image Sequence Analysis (ISA)},
  year = {2015}
}



eXTReMe Tracker