PapersWithELO
← ICLR 2024 leaderboard

MVSFormer++: Revealing the Devil in Transformer's Details for Multi-View Stereo

Chenjie Cao, Xinlin Ren, Yanwei Fu

general MLMulti-View StereoTransformerDepth Estimation
71.60100
Fused
band ≈ ±15 pct pts (from σ = 0.31)
51.00100
Mimo
band ≈ ±22 pct pts (from σ = 0.44)
85.90100
DeepSeek
band ≈ ±22 pct pts (from σ = 0.44)

OpenReview ground truth

Accepted

TL;DR — We unravel the devil in the transformer for MVS in this paper, including the use of different attention types for specific MVS components, normalized 3D positional encoding, attention scaling, and other design details that impact depth estimation.

Abstract

Recent advancements in learning-based Multi-View Stereo (MVS) methods have prominently featured transformer-based models with attention mechanisms. However, existing approaches have not thoroughly investigated the profound influence of transformers on different MVS modules, resulting in limited depth estimation capabilities. In this paper, we introduce MVSFormer++, a method that prudently maximizes the inherent characteristics of attention to enhance various components of the MVS pipeline. Formally, our approach involves infusing cross-view information into the pre-trained DINOv2 model to facilitate MVS learning. Furthermore, we employ different attention mechanisms for the feature encoder and cost volume regularization, focusing on feature and spatial aggregations respectively. Additionally, we uncover that some design details would substantially impact the performance of transformer modules in MVS, including normalized 3D positional encoding, adaptive attention scaling, and the position of layer normalization. Comprehensive experiments on DTU, Tanks-and-Temples, BlendedMVS, and ETH3D validate the effectiveness of the proposed method. Notably, MVSFormer++ achieves state-of-the-art performance on the challenging DTU and Tanks-and-Temples benchmarks. Codes and models are available at https://github.com/maybeLx/MVSFormerPlusPlus.

Author context

Most prolific author: 12 submissions (credibility 1.00).

No mass-submission penalty for this paper (authors within normal submission volume).

Aggregate statistics only — no individual author rankings.

Ranking trajectory

Percentile by tournament round — convergence indicates rating stability.

Battle history — 32 comparisons

Ranked above opponent in 49% of matchups.

Judge assessments

Mean overall score 0.0 ± 0.0 (n = 32)