PLUMENet: Efficient 3D Object Detection from Stereo Images
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
3D object detection is a key component of many robotic applications such as self-driving vehicles. While many approaches rely on expensive 3D sensors such as LiDAR to produce accurate 3D estimates, methods that exploit stereo cameras have recently shown promising results at a lower cost. Existing approaches tackle this problem in two steps: first depth estimation from stereo images is performed to produce a pseudo LiDAR point cloud, which is then used as input to a 3D object detector. However, this approach is suboptimal due to the representation mismatch, as the two tasks are optimized in two different metric spaces. In this paper we propose a model that unifies these two tasks and performs them in the same metric space. Specifically, we directly construct a pseudo LiDAR feature volume (PLUME) in 3D space, which is then used to solve both depth estimation and object detection tasks. Our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance with much faster inference times when compared to existing methods on the challenging KITTI benchmark [1].
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it