aiqbench analysis
This controlled study isolates the impact of dynamic-point filtering on ORB-SLAM2 front-ends across a factorial grid of synthetic indoor scenes varying in texture and motion. The results indicate that while filtering aids tracking in highly dynamic environments, it can significantly reduce tracking completeness in low-texture conditions where static features are already scarce. Furthermore, the analysis reveals that depth-consistency filters (GEOM) exhibit higher false-removal rates for static keypoints compared to optical-flow-based methods, particularly in stereo configurations.
Does Dynamic-Point Filtering Help When Texture Is Scarce? A Controlled Study of ORB-SLAM2 Front-Ends in Synthetic Indoor Scenes
arXiv:2610.10564v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Dynamic-point filters are routinely added to feature-based visual SLAM, and several recent systems argue that removing dynamic features can leave too few static features in low-texture regions. So far, these systems have been evaluated only on texture-rich benchmark sequences. We present a controlled study that isolates this interaction. We render synthetic indoor sequences in which surface texture (four levels, quantified by FAST-corner density and image-gradient entropy) and scene dynamics (three levels) are varied factorially along identical camera trajectories, with stereo, RGB-D, ground-truth poses and dynamic masks. On this grid we compare ORB-SLAM2 without filtering, with an optical-flow and epipolar-residual filter (FLOW), and with a multi-view depth-consistency filter (GEOM), and report trajectory error, tracking completeness and surviving static features over five runs. Because the masks give per-keypoint ground truth, we also measure each filter's dynamic-point precision and recall and its static-feature false-removal rate, so that mechanistic explanations can be tested directly. We do not propose a new filter. On 720 runs over 24 sequences, filtering helped mainly in the most dynamic cells; the benefit did not decline monotonically with texture, but at the lowest level filtering reduced tracking completeness, and ORB-SLAM2 never initialised in static L3 scenes. Contrary to our hypothesis, GEOM discarded more static keypoints than FLOW (median FRR 6.8% vs. 1.5% for RGB-D, 19.6% vs. 1.5% for stereo); its RGB-D advantage tracked dynamic-point recall and vanished in stereo mode. Data and code are available at https://github.com/felixxxue/texture-dynamics-slam.
Title:Does Dynamic-Point Filtering Help When Texture Is Scarce? A Controlled Study of ORB-SLAM2 Front-Ends in Synthetic Indoor Scenes
Abstract:Dynamic-point filters are routinely added to feature-based visual SLAM, and several recent systems argue that removing dynamic features can leave too few static features in low-texture regions. So far, these systems have been evaluated only on texture-rich benchmark sequences. We present a controlled study that isolates this interaction. We render synthetic indoor sequences in which surface texture (four levels, quantified by FAST-corner density and image-gradient entropy) and scene dynamics (three levels) are varied factorially along identical camera trajectories, with stereo, RGB-D, ground-truth poses and dynamic masks. On this grid we compare ORB-SLAM2 without filtering, with an optical-flow and epipolar-residual filter (FLOW), and with a multi-view depth-consistency filter (GEOM), and report trajectory error, tracking completeness and surviving static features over five runs. Because the masks give per-keypoint ground truth, we also measure each filter's dynamic-point precision and recall and its static-feature false-removal rate, so that mechanistic explanations can be tested directly. We do not propose a new filter. On 720 runs over 24 sequences, filtering helped mainly in the most dynamic cells; the benefit did not decline monotonically with texture, but at the lowest level filtering reduced tracking completeness, and ORB-SLAM2 never initialised in static L3 scenes. Contrary to our hypothesis, GEOM discarded more static keypoints than FLOW (median FRR 6.8% vs. 1.5% for RGB-D, 19.6% vs. 1.5% for stereo); its RGB-D advantage tracked dynamic-point recall and vanished in stereo mode. Data and code are available at this https URL.
8 pages, 4 figures, submitted to IROS 2026. Open-source code and dataset available
Robotics (cs.RO); Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV)
arXiv:2610.10564 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2610.10564v1 [cs.RO] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.10564 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 367 words
Related coverage

The Machines that Make the Machines
NVIDIA · Oct 7, 2026

CUDA Toolkit 13.4 Adds Windows on Arm Support and Greater Control over Shared GPUs
NVIDIA · Sep 9, 2026

Streamlining Resource Binding with End-to-End Support for Vulkan Descriptor Heaps
NVIDIA · Jun 25, 2026

A Chinese Perspective on “On Social Reality in China”
LessWrong · Oct 15, 2026