Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 50 references

Event Quality Score (EQS): Assessing the Realism of Simulated Event Camera Streams via Distances in Latent Space

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper introduces EQS, a differentiable metric for raw event streams, and shows that higher EQS predicts better object-detection accuracy after training on simulated data.

desk verdict EQS is a neat, useful idea and a credible first cut, but the central correlation claim is supported by only three simulators with a shared RVT architecture, so treat it as suggestive, not proven. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.12515 v2 pith:PSHUXYLC submitted 2025-04-16 cs.CV

Kaustav Chanda , Aayush Atul Verma , Arpitsinh Vaghela , Yezhou Yang , Bharatesh Chakravarthi This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords eventqualityscorecamerasimulationsim-to-realgaprecurrentvisiontransformerlatentfeaturedistanceobjectdetectionstreamsDSEC
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Event cameras produce labeled data slowly and expensively, so many research pipelines train on simulated event streams; the paper argues that the field has lacked a quantitative way to tell whether a simulator produces events that resemble real sensor output. It introduces EQS, a score computed by passing a real stream and a simulated stream through a pretrained recurrent vision transformer and measuring the average cosine distance between convolutional activations. On the DSEC driving dataset, the paper shows that EQS ranks three simulators in the same order as the real-world object-detection accuracy of a model trained on each simulator's output. If the ranking is predictive in general, EQS gives simulator developers a differentiable, task-independent target for closing the sim-to-real gap.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a latent feature similarity block built on the recurrent vision transformer (RVT), a network that mixes spatial transformer layers with recurrent temporal layers and is pretrained for event-camera object detection. For each of the first three RVT scales, the block averages activations over non-overlapping 3x3 spatial patches to form per-channel vectors, computes the cosine distance between vectors from the real and simulated streams, and averages these distances across patches and scales. This makes EQS a fully differentiable distance between two raw event streams, computed without converting events to an image-like frame first.

What would settle it

Compute EQS and real-data mAP for a fourth, untested simulator: if its EQS is higher than ESIM's but its real mAP is lower, the claimed monotonic link is false. A cheaper version of the same test is to train the detector on two simulators with nearly equal EQS; if their real mAP differs sharply, EQS is not resolving the gap.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a higher EQS implies improved generalization to real-world data after training on simulated events. Concretely, for the ESIM, V2E, and PIX2NVS simulators, EQS averaged over the DSEC dataset gives 0.866, 0.773, and 0.501 respectively, while an RVT-small detector trained on each simulator's output reaches 18.6, 14.3, and 5.4 mAP on the real DSEC test set. The paper interprets this as evidence that the distance between simulated and real activations in the representation space of a detection-pretrained recurrent vision transformer captures the simulation gap, and that EQS can therefore rank simulators and guide their improvement.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the sim-to-real gap is visible in the average cosine distance between RVT activations of simulated and real streams, so that a higher EQS reliably means better downstream transfer; the paper checks this on one detector architecture and three simulators.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Simulator developers gain a single number that predicts whether models trained on their output will transfer to real sensors, replacing expensive train-and-evaluate cycles with a cheap feature-space comparison.
  • Because EQS is differentiable, it can be used as a loss when training a simulator or an event-generation network, turning 'make the stream more realistic' into an objective with a gradient.
  • The metric works on raw event streams of arbitrary length, so it can be applied to new simulators and new sensor resolutions without training a task model.
  • The ranking produced by EQS (ESIM above V2E above PIX2NVS) is consistent with the measured sim-to-real mAP ordering, supporting the claim that higher EQS implies better generalization.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the correlation is causal, minimizing EQS as a training signal should improve transfer for detectors other than RVT-small; that is an extension the paper motivates but does not test.
  • Because the feature extractor is pretrained for object detection, EQS may be biased toward object-centric realism; simulators that score high could still be poor for motion estimation or depth tasks, so a task-specific variant may be needed.
  • An unpaired version of EQS, comparing marginal activation statistics over many scenes rather than paired same-scene streams, would test whether EQS measures general realism rather than the simulator's ability to reproduce one scene's events.
  • EQS could be used as a screening tool to pick which simulated sequences to train on, or as a regularization term during detector training to keep features close to the real-data manifold.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Event Quality Score (EQS), a differentiable metric that compares two raw event streams by computing cosine distances between activations of the first three convolutional blocks of a pretrained recurrent vision transformer (RVT). The authors hypothesize that the sim-to-real gap in event-camera simulation can be captured in this latent feature space. They compute EQS between event streams generated by three simulators (ESIM, V2E, PIX2NVS) and real DSEC data, and compare the resulting scores with the real-world mAP of an RVT-small detector trained on each simulator's output. The observed ordering (ESIM > V2E > PIX2NVS in both EQS and mAP) is presented as evidence that higher EQS implies improved sim-to-real generalization.

Significance. The idea of transferring perceptual metrics such as LPIPS to raw event streams is novel and timely. If the correlation were rigorously established, EQS would be a valuable tool for simulator development, providing a task-independent and differentiable objective. The paper is clearly written, the metric is simple to implement, and the code is released at a public repository. However, the current evidence for the central claim is limited to three simulators, a single downstream architecture, and a single real dataset, without statistical analysis; the significance of the claimed correlation is therefore not yet established at a level appropriate for a journal.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.1, Tables 2 and 3] The central claim that 'a higher EQS implies improved generalization to real-world data' is supported only by three simulator-level data points. No error bars, confidence intervals, correlation coefficient, or significance test are reported. The per-sequence EQS values in Table 2 overlap substantially across simulators (e.g., V2E ranges 0.66–0.83 and ESIM 0.72–0.91), so the average differences may not be statistically reliable. With only three points, the probability that a random ordering would match is 1/6. The authors should report variance across sequences, compute a rank or Pearson correlation with uncertainty, and preferably include additional simulators (e.g., Vid2E, EventGAN, DVS-Voltmeter) to strengthen the claim.
  2. [§4.1 and §5.1] The metric uses RVT activations, and the downstream generalization test uses RVT-small. This shared architecture is a confound: the observed correlation might reflect RVT-specific sensitivity to event statistics such as density or noise rather than a generic property of simulation fidelity. To support the abstract's general claim, the authors should evaluate EQS with an independent downstream architecture (for example, a non-recurrent event detector) or otherwise demonstrate that the correlation is not an artifact of using the same model family.
  3. [§4 and §5] The metric's definition leaves key hyperparameters unspecified or unjustified: the number of temporal bins T and the time interval δt are not reported, and the choice of the first three convolutional blocks and the 3×3 patch size is stated but not ablated. The paper says the patch size is 'discussed in Sec. 5,' but Sec. 5 only describes the chosen value. Since EQS values and hence the claimed correlation may depend on these choices, a sensitivity analysis is needed to ensure the metric is robust and the reported values are reproducible.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1, equation for V_ei] The definition of V_ei is unclear: the text says 'such that ||V_ei|| is the number of channels', which is inconsistent with treating V_ei as a vector. Please clarify what is averaged over the patch and what the norm sign refers to.
  2. [§4.1, equation for CS_pi] The equation for CS_pi is missing a closing norm bar: it should be ||V_e2||.
  3. [§5] The value of T (number of temporal bins) and δt used for the event tensor representation are not given; please specify them for reproducibility.
  4. [§5.1, Table 2] '5 randomly chosen sequences' without a seed makes the selection non-reproducible; specify the seed or the sequence identifiers.
  5. [§6] The conclusion that EQS 'can potentially be used as a loss function' is speculative; no experiment optimizes a generator against EQS. If this claim is retained, a proof-of-concept would be needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

EQS is an independently defined metric; the claimed sim-to-real correlation is empirical, not circular.

full rationale

The paper derives no prediction from EQS by construction. EQS is a fixed, parameter-free function of pretrained RVT activations computed in Section 4.1, and the downstream generalization numbers in Table 3 come from independently training RVT-small on simulated data and evaluating on DSEC. No parameter of EQS is fitted to the mAP values, so the 'higher EQS implies improved generalization' claim is an empirical correlation rather than a definitional equivalence. The stated hypothesis, 'the sim-to-real gap for event-camera data can be captured in the representational space of the network's activations,' is explicitly presented as a hypothesis and is then tested against data; it is not assumed as a conclusion. The shared RVT architecture between the metric and the downstream model is a potential confound and the evidence is limited to three simulators, but a confound or small sample is a correctness/evidence concern, not a circular reduction. The paper's self-citations (e.g., SEVD, eTraM, the survey) appear only as contextual related work and are not load-bearing for EQS. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz-smuggling citation, or renaming of a known result is used to force the central claim. Therefore the score is 0: no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a small set of hand-chosen metric parameters and on the unvalidated hypothesis that deep feature distances predict downstream generalization. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Temporal bin count T
    The event tensor representation requires T temporal bins and a fixed interval delta-t, but no values are stated in the paper. These choices determine what the metric compares and are not ablated.
  • Number of RVT scales used = 3
    Activations from the first three RVT blocks, downsampling by 1/4, 1/8, and 1/16, are used. The paper cites interpretability but provides no ablation supporting this choice.
  • LFS patch size = 3x3
    Feature maps are divided into equal 3x3 non-overlapping patches before cosine similarity is averaged. No justification or ablation is given.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Cosine distance between RVT convolutional activations of simulated and real event tensors is monotonically related to the sim-to-real generalization gap.
    Stated in Section 4.1 as a hypothesis: 'the sim-to-real gap for event-camera data can be captured in the representational space of the network's activations.' This is the load-bearing premise of the whole metric.
  • domain assumption Using synchronized DSEC frames as simulator input and real DSEC events as reference isolates noise-model fidelity from scene-content shift.
    Section 5 says RGB frames are converted to grayscale and fed to each simulator, so simulated and real streams are paired by scene. This makes the comparison interpretable but assumes content mismatch is not a confounding factor.
  • domain assumption RVT activations from a network pretrained on event data for object detection transfer to driving scenes in DSEC.
    Section 4.1 passes event tensors through a pretrained RVT. The text does not state which checkpoint or training data was used, so the suitability of the feature space is assumed.
  • ad hoc to paper The first three convolutional blocks with 3x3 patches are sufficient to capture simulation fidelity.
    Section 5 fixes these design choices without ablation or comparison to other layer selections, making the metric definition partly arbitrary.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Event Quality Score (EQS): Assessing the Realism of Simulated Event Camera Streams via Distances in Latent Space." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PSHUXYLC

@misc{pith2026250412515,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Event Quality Score (EQS): Assessing the Realism of Simulated Event Camera Streams via Distances in Latent Space},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PSHUXYLC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.12515}
}
read the original abstract

Event cameras promise a paradigm shift in vision sensing with their low latency, high dynamic range, and asynchronous nature of events. Unfortunately, the scarcity of high-quality labeled datasets hinders their widespread adoption in deep learning-driven computer vision. To mitigate this, several simulators have been proposed to generate synthetic event data for training models for detection and estimation tasks. However, the fundamentally different sensor design of event cameras compared to traditional frame-based cameras poses a challenge for accurate simulation. As a result, most simulated data fail to mimic data captured by real event cameras. Inspired by existing work on using deep features for image comparison, we introduce event quality score (EQS), a quality metric that utilizes activations of the RVT architecture. Through sim-to-real experiments on the DSEC driving dataset, it is shown that a higher EQS implies improved generalization to real-world data after training on simulated events. Thus, optimizing for EQS can lead to developing more realistic event camera simulators, effectively reducing the simulation gap. EQS is available at https://github.com/eventbasedvision/EQS.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.12515 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematic representation of a recurrent vision transformer (RVT) model trained on simulated event data and evaluated on real [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Simulated events from the V2E [16], ESIM [38], and PIX2NVS [3] event camera simulators and real event camera data visualized as frames where red pixels indicate negative polarity and blue pixels indicate positive polarity. 2. Related Work Initial work on event cameras generally utilized the DVS and DAVIS cameras, followed by more sophisticated sen￾sors developed by Prophesee [37], iniVation [17], and Lu￾cid Vision L… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. (a). Dataset with frames and their corresponding synchronized event streams. Simulated events are generated using frames as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Detection output samples for RVT-small model on real event streams after training on simulated datasets generated using the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Sevd: Synthetic event-based vision dataset for ego and fixed traffic perception

    Manideep Reddy Aliminati, Bharatesh Chakravarthi, Aayush Atul Verma, Arpitsinh Vaghela, Hua Wei, Xuesong Zhou, and Yezhou Yang. Sevd: Synthetic event-based vision dataset for ego and fixed traffic perception. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10540, 2024. 2, 3

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Vista 2.0: An open, data-driven simulator for multimodal sensing and policy learning for autonomous vehicles, 2021

    Alexander Amini, Tsun-Hsuan Wang, Igor Gilitschenski, Wilko Schwarting, Zhijian Liu, Song Han, Sertac Karaman, and Daniela Rus. Vista 2.0: An open, data-driven simulator for multimodal sensing and policy learning for autonomous vehicles, 2021. 3

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Pix2nvs: Parameterized conversion of pixel-domain video frames to neuromorphic vision streams

    Yin Bi and Yiannis Andreopoulos. Pix2nvs: Parameterized conversion of pixel-domain video frames to neuromorphic vision streams. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP), pages 1990–1994, 2017. 2, 3, 4, 6

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Event-based sensing for improved traffic detec- tion and tracking in intelligent transport systems toward sus- tainable mobility

    Bharatesh Chakravarthi, M Manoj Kumar, and BN Pa- van Kumar. Event-based sensing for improved traffic detec- tion and tracking in intelligent transport systems toward sus- tainable mobility. In International Conference on Interdis- ciplinary Approaches in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Development, pages 83–95. Springer, 2023. 2

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Recent event camera innovations: A survey

    Bharatesh Chakravarthi, Aayush Atul Verma, Kostas Dani- ilidis, Cornelia Fermuller, and Yezhou Yang. Recent event camera innovations: A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.13627, 2024. 1

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Contrastive localized language- image pre-training, 2025

    Hong-You Chen, Zhengfeng Lai, Haotian Zhang, Xinze Wang, Marcin Eichner, Keen You, Meng Cao, Bowen Zhang, Yinfei Yang, and Zhe Gan. Contrastive localized language- image pre-training, 2025. 4

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Carla: An open urban driving simulator, 2017

    Alexey Dosovitskiy, German Ros, Felipe Codevilla, Antonio Lopez, and Vladlen Koltun. Carla: An open urban driving simulator, 2017. 2, 3, 4

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Unreal engine

    Epic Games. Unreal engine. 3

    work page

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Davison, J ¨org Conradt, Kostas Daniilidis, and Davide Scaramuzza

    Guillermo Gallego, Tobi Delbr ¨uck, Garrick Orchard, Chiara Bartolozzi, Brian Taba, Andrea Censi, Stefan Leutenegger, Andrew J. Davison, J ¨org Conradt, Kostas Daniilidis, and Davide Scaramuzza. Event-based vision: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine In...

    2022

  2. [10]

    Video to events: Recycling video datasets for event cameras, 2020

    Daniel Gehrig, Mathias Gehrig, Javier Hidalgo-Carri ´o, and Davide Scaramuzza. Video to events: Recycling video datasets for event cameras, 2020. 4

    2020

  3. [11]

    Recurrent vision transformers for object detection with event cameras, 2023

    Mathias Gehrig and Davide Scaramuzza. Recurrent vision transformers for object detection with event cameras, 2023. 2, 4, 5, 6

    2023

  4. [12]

    Dsec: A stereo event camera dataset for driving scenarios, 2021

    Mathias Gehrig, Willem Aarents, Daniel Gehrig, and Davide Scaramuzza. Dsec: A stereo event camera dataset for driving scenarios, 2021. 2, 3, 6, 7

    2021

  5. [13]

    Daxin Gu, Jia Li, Lin Zhu, Yu Zhang, and Jimmy S. Ren. Reliable event generation with invertible conditional normal- izing flow. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Ma- chine Intelligence, 46(2):927–943, 2024. 3

    2024

  6. [14]

    Physical-based event camera simulator

    Haiqian Han, Jiacheng Lyu, Jianing Li, Henglu Wei, Cheng Li, Yajing Wei, Shu Chen, and Xiangyang Ji. Physical-based event camera simulator. In European Conference on Com- puter Vision, pages 19–35. Springer, 2024. 2, 3, 4

    2024

  7. [15]

    Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilib- rium, 2018

    Martin Heusel, Hubert Ramsauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Bernhard Nessler, and Sepp Hochreiter. Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilib- rium, 2018. 4

    2018

  8. [16]

    v2e: From video frames to realistic dvs events, 2021

    Yuhuang Hu, Shih-Chii Liu, and Tobi Delbruck. v2e: From video frames to realistic dvs events, 2021. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

    2021

  9. [17]

    Inivation

    Inc Inivation. Inivation. https://inivation.com/ solutions/cameras/. 3

  10. [18]

    Re- thinking fid: Towards a better evaluation metric for image generation, 2024

    Sadeep Jayasumana, Srikumar Ramalingam, Andreas Veit, Daniel Glasner, Ayan Chakrabarti, and Sanjiv Kumar. Re- thinking fid: Towards a better evaluation metric for image generation, 2024. 4

    2024

  11. [19]

    Adv2e: Bridging the gap between analogue circuit and discrete frames in the video-to-events simulator, 2024

    Xiao Jiang, Fei Zhou, and Jiongzhi Lin. Adv2e: Bridging the gap between analogue circuit and discrete frames in the video-to-events simulator, 2024. 4

    2024

  12. [20]

    Event camera simulator improvements via characterized parameters

    Damien Joubert, Alexandre Marcireau, Nic Ralph, Andrew Jolley, Andr´e van Schaik, and Gregory Cohen. Event camera simulator improvements via characterized parameters. Fron- tiers in Neuroscience, 15:702765, 2021. 2, 3, 4

    2021

  13. [21]

    Kaiser, J

    J. Kaiser, J. C. V . Tieck, C. Hubschneider, P. Wolf, M. We- ber, M. Hoff, A. Friedrich, K. Wojtasik, A. Roennau, R. Kohlhaas, R. Dillmann, and J. M. Z¨ollner. Towards a frame- work for end-to-end control of a simulated vehicle with spik- ing neural networks. In 2016 IEEE Inte...

    2016

  14. [22]

    Deep feature space: A geometrical perspective

    Ioannis Kansizoglou, Loukas Bampis, and Antonios Gaster- atos. Deep feature space: A geometrical perspective. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 44(10):6823–6838, 2022. 4

    2022

  15. [23]

    N-imagenet: Towards robust, fine-grained object recognition with event cameras, 2022

    Junho Kim, Jaehyeok Bae, Gangin Park, Dongsu Zhang, and Young Min Kim. N-imagenet: Towards robust, fine-grained object recognition with event cameras, 2022. 2

    2022

  16. [24]

    Orchard, Francesco Galluppi, Bertram E

    Xavier Lagorce, G. Orchard, Francesco Galluppi, Bertram E. Shi, and Ryad B. Benosman. Hots: A hierarchy of event- based time-surfaces for pattern recognition. IEEE Trans- actions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence , 39: 1346–1359, 2017. 3

    2017

  17. [25]

    Event-assisted low-light video object segmentation,

    Hebei Li, Jin Wang, Jiahui Yuan, Yue Li, Wenming Weng, Yansong Peng, Yueyi Zhang, Zhiwei Xiong, and Xiaoyan Sun. Event-assisted low-light video object segmentation,

  18. [26]

    Global-local feature aggregation for event-based ob- ject detection on eventkitti

    Zichen Liang, Hu Cao, Chu Yang, Zikai Zhang, and Guang Chen. Global-local feature aggregation for event-based ob- ject detection on eventkitti. In2022 IEEE International Con- ference on Multisensor Fusion and Integration for Intelligent Systems (MFI), pages 1–7, 2022. 2

    2022

  19. [27]

    A 128× 128 120 db 15µs latency asynchronous temporal con- This paper has been accepted at the 5th International Workshop on Event-Based Vision (CVPR 2025) trast vision sensor

    Patrick Lichtsteiner, Christoph Posch, and Tobi Delbruck. A 128× 128 120 db 15µs latency asynchronous temporal con- This paper has been accepted at the 5th International Workshop on Event-Based Vision (CVPR 2025) trast vision sensor. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 43 (2...

    2025

  20. [28]

    Dvs- voltmeter: Stochastic process-based event simulator for dy- namic vision sensors

    Songnan Lin, Ye Ma, Zhenhua Guo, and Bihan Wen. Dvs- voltmeter: Stochastic process-based event simulator for dy- namic vision sensors. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 2022. 2, 4

    2022

  21. [29]

    Mo- tion robust high-speed light-weighted object detection with event camera

    Bingde Liu, Chang Xu, Wen Yang, Huai Yu, and Lei Yu. Mo- tion robust high-speed light-weighted object detection with event camera. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 72:1–13, 2023. 2

    2023

  22. [30]

    Seeing motion at nighttime with an event camera, 2024

    Haoyue Liu, Shihan Peng, Lin Zhu, Yi Chang, Hanyu Zhou, and Luxin Yan. Seeing motion at nighttime with an event camera, 2024. 2

    2024

  23. [31]

    Lucid vision labs

    Inc Lucid vision labs. Lucid vision labs. https:// thinklucid.com/triton2-evs/. 3

  24. [32]

    The event-camera dataset and simulator: Event-based data for pose estimation, visual odometry, and slam

    Elias Mueggler, Henri Rebecq, Guillermo Gallego, Tobi Del- bruck, and Davide Scaramuzza. The event-camera dataset and simulator: Event-based data for pose estimation, visual odometry, and slam. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 36:142–149, 2017. 2, 3

    2017

  25. [33]

    Event-based shape from polarization

    Manasi Muglikar, Leonard Bauersfeld, Diederik Moeys, and Davide Scaramuzza. Event-based shape from polarization. In IEEE / CVF Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference (CVPR), 2023. 2

    2023

  26. [34]

    Event cameras meet spads for high-speed, low-bandwidth imaging, 2024

    Manasi Muglikar, Siddharth Somasundaram, Akshat Dave, Edoardo Charbon, Ramesh Raskar, and Davide Scaramuzza. Event cameras meet spads for high-speed, low-bandwidth imaging, 2024. 2

    2024

  27. [35]

    Learning to detect objects with a 1 megapixel event camera, 2020

    Etienne Perot, Pierre de Tournemire, Davide Nitti, Jonathan Masci, and Amos Sironi. Learning to detect objects with a 1 megapixel event camera, 2020. 3

    2020

  28. [36]

    Pijnacker Hordijk, Kirk Y

    Bas J. Pijnacker Hordijk, Kirk Y . W. Scheper, and Guido C. H. E. de Croon. Vertical landing for micro air vehicles using event-based optical flow. Journal of Field Robotics , 35(1): 69–90, 2017. 2

    2017

  29. [37]

    Prophesee

    Inc Prophesee. Prophesee. https://www.prophesee. ai/event-based-sensors/. 3, 4

  30. [38]

    Esim: an open event camera simulator

    Henri Rebecq, Daniel Gehrig, and Davide Scaramuzza. Esim: an open event camera simulator. In Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 2018. 3, 4, 5, 6

    2018

  31. [39]

    Events-to-video: Bringing modern computer vision to event cameras, 2019

    Henri Rebecq, Ren ´e Ranftl, Vladlen Koltun, and Davide Scaramuzza. Events-to-video: Bringing modern computer vision to event cameras, 2019. 2

    2019

  32. [40]

    U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,

  33. [41]

    Very deep convo- lutional networks for large-scale image recognition, 2015

    Karen Simonyan and Andrew Zisserman. Very deep convo- lutional networks for large-scale image recognition, 2015. 2

    2015

  34. [42]

    Hats: Histograms of aver- aged time surfaces for robust event-based object classifica- tion, 2018

    Amos Sironi, Manuele Brambilla, Nicolas Bourdis, Xavier Lagorce, and Ryad Benosman. Hats: Histograms of aver- aged time surfaces for robust event-based object classifica- tion, 2018. 3

    2018

  35. [43]

    Reducing the Sim-to-Real Gap for Event Cameras, pages 534–549

    Timo Stoffregen, Cedric Scheerlinck, Davide Scaramuzza, Tom Drummond, Nick Barnes, Lindsay Kleeman, and Robert Mahony. Reducing the Sim-to-Real Gap for Event Cameras, pages 534–549. 2020. 2

    2020

  36. [44]

    etram: Event-based traffic monitoring dataset

    Aayush Atul Verma, Bharatesh Chakravarthi, Arpitsinh Vaghela, Hua Wei, and Yezhou Yang. etram: Event-based traffic monitoring dataset. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 22637–22646, 2024. 3

    2024

  37. [45]

    Ultimate slam? combining events, images, and imu for robust visual slam in hdr and high- speed scenarios

    Antoni Rosinol Vidal, Henri Rebecq, Timo Horstschaefer, and Davide Scaramuzza. Ultimate slam? combining events, images, and imu for robust visual slam in hdr and high- speed scenarios. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 3 (2):994–1001, 2018. 2

    2018

  38. [46]

    Bovik, H.R

    Zhou Wang, A.C. Bovik, H.R. Sheikh, and E.P. Simoncelli. Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing , 13(4): 600–612, 2004. 2

    2004

  39. [47]

    Efros, Eli Shecht- man, and Oliver Wang

    Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A. Efros, Eli Shecht- man, and Oliver Wang. The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric. In 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pages 586–595, 2018. 2, 4

    2018

  40. [48]

    Neu- romorphic high-frequency 3d dancing pose estimation in dy- namic environment

    Zhongyang Zhang, Kaidong Chai, Haowen Yu, Ramzi Ma- jaj, Francesca Walsh, Edward Wang, Upal Mahbub, Hava Siegelmann, Donghyun Kim, and Tauhidur Rahman. Neu- romorphic high-frequency 3d dancing pose estimation in dy- namic environment. Neurocomputing, 547:126388, 2023. 2

    2023

  41. [49]

    The multi- vehicle stereo event camera dataset: An event camera dataset for 3d perception

    Alex Zihao Zhu, Dinesh Thakur, Tolga Ozaslan, Bernd Pfrommer, Vijay Kumar, and Kostas Daniilidis. The multi- vehicle stereo event camera dataset: An event camera dataset for 3d perception. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 3 (3):2032–2039, 2018. 3

    2018

  42. [50]

    Eventgan: Leveraging large scale image datasets for event cameras

    Alex Zihao Zhu, Ziyun Wang, Kaung Khant, and Kostas Daniilidis. Eventgan: Leveraging large scale image datasets for event cameras. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Computational Photography, ICCP 2021, 2021. 3, 4, 5

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.