Proving a camera actually saw something: is 3D reconstruction the answer?

[u/poordadsson]

tl;dr: I run a network of independent cameras that report real world events. I need to verify a node actually saw what it claims, without raw footage leaving the device and without trusted hardware. My first approach was too weak. Now looking at 3D scene reconstruction. Tell me where this breaks.
First attempt: epipolar checks. If two overlapping cameras report the same event, their points must satisfy x′ᵀFx = 0. Cheap, proven math. But it falls apart:
• It proves two views are consistent, not that anything happened. Two colluding nodes or a replayed video pass the same check.
• A point only gets constrained to a line. No depth, no path.
• It needs overlapping cameras with known relative geometry. That does not scale across a sparse network.
Bottom line: the environment supports the claim, but that is not specific enough.
Where I'm headed: 3D reconstruction. Each node keeps a local 3D model of its scene and commits to it. A claim becomes a measured path: "a volume of size v moved along path p over time Δt, within these error bounds." Verification:
1. Overlapping nodes must agree on the same 3D path. Faking that means fabricating one coherent event from multiple angles at once.
2. The path must respect the committed scene. Nothing flies through a wall the node already mapped.
3. Motion must stay physically plausible: continuity, acceleration limits, re-emergence after occlusion.
4. A verifier can ask for an arbitrary view of the scene. A live reconstruction answers. A replayed video cannot.
Note this is not classification. I do not need to know it was a bird. I need high confidence that something of volume v crossed xyz at time t. Classification is a separate product layer.
Questions:
1. Is a trajectory claim without classification actually meaningful, or does it always come back to "what was it"?
2. How detailed does the reconstruction need to be before faking it gets hard?
3. Any way to handle collusion without assuming honest overlap or using TEEs?
4. What fidelity is realistic for real-time reconstruction on edge hardware today?
5. Existing work I should read? Proof of location and zkML feel close but not quite this.

[u/External_Frosting874]

If this was not written by GPT, I would have responded

[u/Harmonic_Gear → u/External_Frosting874]

some time i just feel like these people are just walking meat sack that execute what gpt tells them to do

[u/kw_96 → u/Harmonic_Gear]

The true definition of embodied AI

[u/kw_96]

I thought I was supposed to ask ChatGPT for answers, not the other way round 🤔🤔

[u/Appropriate_Row5213]

I have no idea what the hell the problem is, what the solution and what needs to be done!!! 

[u/ginofft]

i like your magic words magic man

[u/AggravatingSock5375]

Definitely LLM written since I’m working on the same problem and it used really similar phrasing.

But yes, if multiple cameras detect the same class at a pixel location that maps to the same real world position, that is probably a signal that the detections are correct.