DSM-Free UAV Visual Localization via Latent-Depth Variable Projection and Structure-Adaptive Coupling
Authors: Yibin Ye, Xichao Teng, Shuo Chen, Xiaokai Song, Yuli Sun, Qifeng Yu, Zhang Li
Organizations: College of Aerospace Science and Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China, and Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Image Measurement and Vision Navigation, Changsha 410073, China. · College of Electronic Science and Technology, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China.
Visual localization enables unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to maintain absolute positioning in GNSS-denied environments. A common approach matches UAV images with geo-tagged orthographic maps and estimates camera pose using Perspective-n-Point (PnP) with elevations from Digital Surface Models (DSMs). However, accurate and up-to-date DSMs are often unavailable in practice. Orthographic-perspective geometry (OPG) enables DSM-free localization in scenes with varying elevations, yet existing methods typically estimate pose indirectly through intermediate matrix estimation and decomposition. To address this limitation, we propose Latent-Depth Variable Projection (LDVP), which treats the unknown scales along perspective viewing rays as latent depths. By analytically eliminating these depths and solving for the horizontal camera center in closed form given the rotation, LDVP reduces nonlinear estimation to a rotation-only problem, enabling direct recovery of metric horizontal position without assuming a planar scene. To improve localization robustness across different scene structures, we further introduce Structure-Adaptive Coupling (SAC), which uses relative scene structure inferred from monocular depth estimation to select LDVP when the matched points are not dominated by a single plane, and Planar-PnP otherwise. Our local observability analysis reveals how scene elevation variation affects the geometric constraints of OPG, providing a basis for this adaptive strategy. Extensive experiments show that LDVP consistently outperforms existing OPG-based DSM-free methods, while SAC further improves robustness across diverse scenes and substantially narrows the gap to DSM-based localization. Code will be released at https://github.com/UAV-AVL/LDVP-SAC.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : Overview of the proposed DSM-free UAV localization framework. LDVP directly estimates the metric horizontal camera position by analytically eliminating the latent depths. SAC uses relative scene structure inferred from monocular depth to adaptively select between LDVP and Planar-PnP, exploiting their complementary strengths across different scene structures.
Fig. 2 : Synthetic evaluation under the smooth sinusoidal terrain model. The x-axis in (b) and (c) denotes matched-point relief ( P90−P10 , in meters), where P90 and P10 are the 90th and 10th percentiles of matched-point elevations.
Method
AnyVisLoc
OrthoLoC
A@1 (%)
A@3 (%)
A@5 (%)
Med. (m)
A@1 (%)
A@3 (%)
A@5 (%)
Med. (m)
DSM-PnP
82.22
96.74
97.20
0.46
72.48
84.09
86.55
0.46
Planar-PnP
16.50
50.72
66.17
2.93
17.49
53.66
69.64
2.72
AH
28.01
54.87
64.99
2.44
19.16
35.37
41.68
11.36
OPE
41.37
70.76
80.91
1.37
36.73
59.66
69.28
1.83
LDVP (ours)
48.59
75.41
82.87
1.05
39.89
59.28
66.23
1.69
TABLE I : Localization results on AnyVisLoc and OrthoLoC using RoMa correspondences. Best and second-best DSM-free results are shown in bold and underline , respectively. DSM-PnP is excluded from the ranking.
Fig. 3 : Structural analysis of Planar-PnP, LDVP, and SAC on AnyVisLoc and OrthoLoC using RoMa correspondences. (a) Cumulative distribution of the true matched-point DSM relief, measured by P90−P10 . (b) Fraction of queries for which Planar-PnP or LDVP yields the lower localization error in each relief interval. (c) Fraction of queries for which SAC selects Planar-PnP. (d) Agreement between the SAC-selected branch and the lower-error solver.
Fig. 4 : Scene-level localization results for Case 1 (AnyVisLoc Scene 07), a mixed urban–farmland environment. The upper region of the reference map (white polygon) contains pronounced urban height variations, whereas most of the remaining area is relatively flat farmland. The panels show the reference map, DSM, and localization results of DSM-PnP, Planar-PnP, OPE, AH, LDVP, and LDVP+SAC. Localization errors are color-coded using the 1 m and 5 m thresholds.
Fig. 5 : Representative SAC decisions in Case 1 (AnyVisLoc Scene 07). Each example visualizes the UAV–reference matched points, reference DSM, monocular depth, recovered 3D structure and dominant-plane support, and the resulting localization estimates. DSM elevations are shown only for retrospective analysis and are not used by SAC.
Fig. 6 : Scene-level localization results for Case 2 (AnyVisLoc Scene 03), a dense urban environment with strong multi-level elevation structure. Planar-PnP degrades substantially in this regime, whereas LDVP and LDVP+SAC remain more stable.
Fig. 7 : Representative query from Case 2 (AnyVisLoc Scene 03). The matched points span strongly varying elevations, with a dominant-plane support ratio of S1=0.156 ; SAC therefore selects LDVP.
Fig. 8 : Representative SAC decisions on the OrthoLoC dataset. The top row shows two queries with weak dominant-plane support, for which SAC selects LDVP, while the bottom row shows two queries with strong dominant-plane support, for which SAC switches to Planar-PnP. Each example visualizes the UAV–reference matched points, reference DSM, monocular depth, recovered 3D structure and dominant-plane support, and the resulting localization estimates.
Dataset / τS
SelP (%)
ΔA@1
ΔA@3
ΔA@5
AnyVisLoc / 0.30
33.2
+0.74
+6.72
+6.99
AnyVisLoc / 0.40
23.3
+2.61
+7.21
+6.85
AnyVisLoc / 0.50
14.9
+2.76
+6.10
+5.49
AnyVisLoc / 0.60
8.3
+1.84
+3.84
+3.50
OrthoLoC / 0.30
57.02
-4.87
+4.72
+8.59
OrthoLoC / 0.40
33.47
-1.91
+4.52
+6.71
TABLE II : Sensitivity to the SAC consensus threshold using RoMa. ΔA@τ denotes the percentage-point change relative to LDVP; SelP denotes the percentage of queries assigned to Planar-PnP.
Matching method
Localization method
AnyVisLoc
OrthoLoC
A@1 (%)
A@3 (%)
A@5 (%)
Med. (m)
A@1 (%)
A@3 (%)
A@5 (%)
Med. (m)
SuperPoint+LightGlue
DSM-PnP
41.23
84.55
91.92
1.20
49.45
61.25
63.16
0.83
Planar-PnP
7.98
33.20
49.99
4.93
9.21
34.92
47.82
4.52
AH
8.07
23.87
33.28
11.37
10.77
23.50
29.70
23.50
OPE
6.22
21.83
32.18
9.91
13.45
29.93
39.19
8.02
LDVP (ours)
17.77
38.65
50.73
4.77
23.25
40.54
47.95
4.76
TABLE III : Localization results with different matching methods. Best and second-best DSM-free results are shown in bold and underline , respectively. DSM-PnP is excluded from the ranking.
Method
AnyVisLoc
OrthoLoC
A@1
A@3
A@5
Med.
A@1
A@3
A@5
Med.
LDVP
48.59
75.41
82.87
1.05
39.89
59.28
66.23
1.69
LDVP+SAC (MoGe2-Aerial)
51.35
81.51
88.36
0.97
39.34
62.05
70.33
1.66
LDVP+SAC (MoGe2)
51.19
80.92
87.87
0.97
39.72
61.62
69.57
1.64
LDVP+SAC (Depth Anything 3)
51.25
81.64
88.50
0.97
38.53
62.49
71.34
1.70
TABLE IV : Ablation of the monocular depth model used by SAC with RoMa correspondences and τS=0.5 . A@1 , A@3 , and A@5 are reported in percentages (%), and Med. in meters (m).
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) increasingly require robust visual localization in GNSS-denied environments. A common solution estimates UAV poses by matching keypoints between UAV images and geo-tagged orthographic reference maps derived from satellite or aerial imagery, followed by Perspective-n-Point (PnP) pose solving. However, such reference maps mainly record top-down surfaces such as roofs and ground planes, while vertical structures such as facades and walls are often compressed or missing. Consequently, many visually distinctive keypoints in low-altitude UAV images have no valid counterparts in the reference map, leading to redundant matches and inaccurate pose estimation. To address this issue, we propose DECO, a DEpth-guided CO-visibility reasoning framework for low-altitude UAV visual localization. DECO uses monocular depth priors to infer local surface geometry and estimate co-visible regions between UAV images and the reference map. Based on this prior, a Geometry-Saliency Coupled Co-visibility Score is introduced to jointly consider geometric co-visibility and detector saliency for keypoint ranking. In this way, DECO retains keypoints that are both visually distinctive and geometrically co-visible, improving feature matching and PnP-based pose estimation. Extensive experiments demonstrate that DECO achieves superior localization performance and can be integrated with different depth models, feature detectors, and matchers. The source code will be available at https://github.com/UAV-AVL/DECO.
Yibin Ye, Xichao Teng, Shuo Chen +4
College of Aerospace Science and Engineering, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China
Global visual localization of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) using remote-sensing reference maps has attracted increasing attention. However, acquisition-time and imaging-platform differences between UAV and reference imagery induce substantial cross-domain appearance and viewpoint shifts, challenging robust six-degree-of-freedom (6-DoF) pose estimation. We address these shifts by sampling UAV-viewpoint reference views from Google 3D Tiles across locations, altitudes, and orientations. A two-stage cross-domain fine-tuning recipe adapts SALAD using pose-near positives and geographically distant hard negatives, while local geometric consistency re-ranks the Top-K candidates. We further propose Retrieval-In-Matching (RIM), which freezes the adapted DINOv2-B retriever and distils a local-descriptor decoder that reuses its token field alongside a shallow VGG19 detail stream. One query-side DINOv2-B forward thus serves both SALAD retrieval and local description, eliminating a second foundation-model backbone while preserving retrieval descriptors by construction. We evaluate RIM zero-shot on the reconstructed EPFL Urbanscape and self-collected Chang'an Park datasets, both geographically disjoint from the training data. RIM outperforms ten recent retrieval baseline families. At 25/50 m under the full 3D distance metric, it improves Recall@1 over SALAD by 8.55/13.77 percentage points on EPFL and 4.45/8.94 points on Park. At Top-K=5, the complete measured localization query, including retrieval, candidate matching, and robust geometric verification, takes 67.9 ms end-to-end: 1.8 times faster than the strongest separate sparse-matching baseline and over 40 times faster than RoMa, while achieving comparable re-ranking accuracy. These results establish an efficient and deployable pipeline for UAV global visual localization in GNSS-challenged environments.
Xin Li, Siyuan Duan, Shang Wang +3
Key Laboratory of Spectral Imaging Technology CAS, Xi’an Institute of Optics and Precision Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xi’an, 710119, China · University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100049, China
Cross-view geo-localization for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) operating in GNSS-denied environments remains challenging due to the severe geometric discrepancy between oblique UAV imagery and orthogonal satellite maps. Most existing methods address this problem through a decoupled pipeline of place retrieval and pose estimation, implicitly treating perspective distortion as appearance noise rather than an explicit geometric transformation. In this work, we propose a geometry-aware UAV geo-localization framework that explicitly models the 3D scene geometry to unify coarse place recognition and fine-grained pose estimation within a single inference pipeline. Our approach reconstructs a local 3D scene from multi-view UAV image sequences using a Visual Geometry Grounded Transformer (VGGT), and renders a virtual Bird's-Eye View (BEV) representation that orthorectifies the UAV perspective to align with satellite imagery. This BEV serves as a geometric intermediary that enables robust cross-view retrieval and provides spatial priors for accurate 3 Degrees of Freedom (3-DoF) pose regression. To efficiently handle multiple location hypotheses, we introduce a Satellite-wise Attention Block that isolates the interaction between each satellite candidate and the reconstructed UAV scene, preventing inter-candidate interference while maintaining linear computational complexity. In addition, we release a recalibrated version of the University-1652 dataset with precise coordinate annotations and spatial overlap analysis, enabling rigorous evaluation of end-to-end localization accuracy. Extensive experiments on the refined University-1652 benchmark and SUES-200 demonstrate that our method significantly outperforms state-of-the-art baselines, achieving robust meter-level localization accuracy and improved generalization in complex urban environments.
Haoyuan Li, Wen Yang, Fang Xu +4
School of Electronic Information, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China · School of Artificial Intelligence, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China · Technology and Engineering Center for Space Utilization and the Key Laboratory of Space Utilization, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100094, China +1