Can you elaborate on your reasoning? I’m shaky on some of logic here.
“Monocular” cameras > no “absolute” depth > less safe
The last leap is not well justified.
Also, cars with vision based driving have multiple cameras. Whats the difference between a “binocular” camera and two “monocular” cameras?
How does a “binocular” camera get better depth information?
Is using multiple cameras to drive sensor fusion?
Why is absolute depth a strict safety win? How do you know how the sensor details translate to the final safety of the full system?
If this is just a handwavey upper bound on safety, how do you know that such a system can’t be safe enough for its design goals?
If humans with only one eye are able to drive, why wouldn’t mono surround vision be at least as good as that?
“Monocular” cameras > no “absolute” depth > less safe
The last leap is not well justified.
Also, cars with vision based driving have multiple cameras. Whats the difference between a “binocular” camera and two “monocular” cameras?
How does a “binocular” camera get better depth information?
Is using multiple cameras to drive sensor fusion?
Why is absolute depth a strict safety win? How do you know how the sensor details translate to the final safety of the full system?
If this is just a handwavey upper bound on safety, how do you know that such a system can’t be safe enough for its design goals?
If humans with only one eye are able to drive, why wouldn’t mono surround vision be at least as good as that?