MemorySeg: Online LiDAR Semantic Segmentation with a Latent Memory
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
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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