Analysis of Differential and Matching Methods for Optical Flow

Several algorithms for optical flow are studied theoretically and experimentally. Differential and matching methods are examined; these two methods have differing domains of application- differential methods are best when displacements in the image are small (<2 pixels) while matching methods work well for moderate displacements but do not handle sub-pixel motions. Both types of optical flow algorithm can use either local or global constraints, such as spatial smoothness. Local matching and differential techniques and global differential techniques will be examined. Most algorithms for optical flow utilize weak assumptions on the local variation of the flow and on the variation of image brightness. Strengthening these assumptions improves the flow computation. The computational consequence of this is a need for larger spatial and temporal support. Global differential approaches can be extended to local (patchwise) differential methods and local differential methods using higher derivatives. Using larger support is valid when constraint on the local shape of the flow are satisfied. We show that a simple constraint on the local shape of the optical flow, that there is slow spatial variation in the image plane, is often satisfied. We show how local differential methods imply the constraints for related methods using higher derivatives. Experiments show the behavior of these optical flow methods on velocity fields which so not obey the assumptions. Implementation of these methods highlights the importance of numerical differentiation. Numerical approximation of derivatives require care, in two respects: first, it is important that the temporal and spatial derivatives be matched, because of the significant scale differences in space and time, and, second, the derivative estimates improve with larger support.

Combining Associational and Causal Reasoning to Solve Interpretation and Planning Problems

This report describes a paradigm for combining associational and causal reasoning to achieve efficient and robust problem-solving behavior. The Generate, Test and Debug (GTD) paradigm generates initial hypotheses using associational (heuristic) rules. The tester verifies hypotheses, supplying the debugger with causal explanations for bugs found if the test fails. The debugger uses domain-independent causal reasoning techniques to repair hypotheses, analyzing domain models and the causal explanations produced by the tester to determine how to replace faulty assumptions made by the generator. We analyze the strengths and weaknesses of associational and causal reasoning techniques, and present a theory of debugging plans and interpretations. The GTD paradigm has been implemented and tested in the domains of geologic interpretation, the blocks world, and Tower of Hanoi problems.