SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2201.04501

Automatic Labeling to Generate Training Data for Online LiDAR-based Moving Object Segmentation

Abstract

Understanding the scene is key for autonomously navigating vehicles and the ability to segment the surroundings online into moving and non-moving objects is a central ingredient for this task. Often, deep learning-based methods are used to perform moving object segmentation (MOS). The performance of these networks, however, strongly depends on the diversity and amount of labeled training data, information that may be costly to obtain. In this paper, we propose an automatic data labeling pipeline for 3D LiDAR data to save the extensive manual labeling effort and to improve the performance of existing learning-based MOS systems by automatically generating labeled training data. Our proposed approach achieves this by processing the data offline in batches. It first exploits an occupancy-based dynamic object removal to detect possible dynamic objects coarsely. Second, it extracts segments among the proposals and tracks them using a Kalman filter. Based on the tracked trajectories, it labels the actually moving objects such as driving cars and pedestrians as moving. In contrast, the non-moving objects, e.g., parked cars, lamps, roads, or buildings, are labeled as static. We show that this approach allows us to label LiDAR data highly effectively and compare our results to those of other label generation methods. We also train a deep neural network with our auto-generated labels and achieve similar performance compared to the one trained with manual labels on the same data, and an even better performance when using additional datasets with labels generated by our approach. Furthermore, we evaluate our method on multiple datasets using different sensors and our experiments indicate that our method can generate labels in diverse environments.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Xieyuanli Chen, Benedikt Mersch, Lucas Nunes, Rodrigo Marcuzzi, Ignacio Vizzo, Jens Behley, Cyrill Stachniss. 2022-01-12. Automatic Labeling to Generate Training Data for Online LiDAR-based Moving Object Segmentation. https://doi.org/10.1109/lra.2022.3166544

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO