MemorySeg: Online LiDAR Semantic Segmentation with a Latent Memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semantic segmentation of LiDAR point clouds has been widely studied in recent years, with most existing methods focusing on tackling this task using a single scan of the environment, However, leveraging the temporal stream of observations can provide very rich contextual information on regions of the scene with poor visibility (e.g., occlusions) or sparse observations (e.g., at long range), and can help reduce redundant computation frame after frame. In this paper, we tackle the challenge of exploiting the information from the past frames to improve the predictions of the current frame in an online fashion. To address this challenge, we propose a novel framework for semantic segmentation of a temporal sequence of LiDAR point clouds that utilizes a memory network to store, update and retrieve past information. Our framework also includes a novel regularizer that penalizes prediction variations in the neighborhood of the point cloud. Prior works have attempted to incorporate memory in range view representations for semantic segmentation, but these methods fail to handle occlusions and the range view representation of the scene changes drastically as agents nearby move. Our proposed framework overcomes these limitations by building a sparse 3D latent representation of the surroundings. We evaluate our method on SemanticKITTI, nuScenes, and PandaSet. Our experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework compared to the state-of-the-art. For more information, visit the project website: https://waabi.ai/research/memoryseg.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".