DIDLM: A SLAM Dataset for Difficult Scenarios Featuring Infrared, Depth Cameras, LiDAR, 4D Radar, and Others Under Adverse Weather, Low Light Conditions, and Rough Roads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adverse weather conditions, low-light environments, and bumpy road surfaces pose significant challenges to SLAM in robotic navigation and autonomous driving. Existing datasets in this field predominantly rely on single sensors or combinations of LiDAR, cameras, and IMUs. However, 4D millimeter-wave radar demonstrates robustness in adverse weather, infrared cameras excel in capturing details under low-light conditions, and depth images provide richer spatial information. Multi-sensor fusion methods also show potential for better adaptation to bumpy roads. Despite some SLAM studies incorporating these sensors and conditions, there remains a lack of comprehensive datasets addressing low-light environments and bumpy road conditions, or featuring a sufficiently diverse range of sensor data. In this study, we introduce a multi-sensor dataset covering challenging scenarios such as snowy weather, rainy weather, nighttime conditions, speed bumps, and rough terrains. The dataset includes rarely utilized sensors for extreme conditions, such as 4D millimeter-wave radar, infrared cameras, and depth cameras, alongside 3D LiDAR, RGB cameras, GPS, and IMU. It supports both autonomous driving and ground robot applications and provides reliable GPS/INS ground truth data, covering structured and semi-structured terrains. We evaluated various SLAM algorithms using this dataset, including RGB images, infrared images, depth images, LiDAR, and 4D millimeter-wave radar. The dataset spans a total of 18.5 km, 69 minutes, and approximately 660 GB, offering a valuable resource for advancing SLAM research under complex and extreme conditions. Our dataset is available athttps://gongweisheng.github.io/DIDLM.github.io/
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.009 |
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".