Cited by 1,5433D Shape Modeling and AnalysisAdvanced Neural Network Applications3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage

Large-Scale Point Cloud Semantic Segmentation with Superpoint Graphs

Open access
Landrieu, Loic, Simonovsky, Martin·2018·2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

Abstract

We propose a novel deep learning-based framework to tackle the challenge of semantic segmentation of large-scale point clouds of millions of points. We argue that the organization of 3D point clouds can be efficiently captured by a structure called superpoint graph (SPG), derived from a partition of the scanned scene into geometrically homogeneous elements. SPGs offer a compact yet rich representation of contextual relationships between object parts, which is then exploited by a graph convolutional network. Our framework sets a new state of the art for segmenting outdoor LiDAR scans (+11.9 and +8.8 mIoU points for both Semantic3D test sets), as well as indoor scans (+12.4 mIoU points for the S3DIS dataset).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/cvpr.2018.00479

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. H. Hu, D. Munoz, J. A. Bagnell, and M. Hebert. Efficient 3-d scene analysis from streaming data. In ICRA, 2013. 2
  2. M. Jaderberg, K. Simonyan, A. Zisserman, and K. Kavukcuoglu. Spatial transformer networks. In NIPS, pages 2017-2025. 2015. 4
  3. S. Kullback and R. A. Leibler. On information and suffi- ciency. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 22 (1):79-86, 1951. 6
  4. Y. Li, D. Tarlow, M. Brockschmidt, and R. S. Zemel. Gated graph sequence neural networks. In ICLR, 2016. 4
  5. X. Liang, L. Lin, X. Shen, J. Feng, S. Yan, and E. P. Xing. In- terpretable structure-evolving LSTM. In CVPR, pages 2175- 2184, 2017. 2
  6. C. R. Qi, L. Yi, H. Su, and L. J. Guibas. PointNet++: Deep hierarchical feature learning on point sets in a metric space. In NIPS, 2017. 1, 2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Landrieu, L., & Simonovsky, M.
Affiliations
École nationale des ponts et chaussées (FR)
Venue
2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2018-06
Pages
4558-4567
ISSN
1063-6919 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2769473888
Cited by
1,543
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 99 · 2025: 151 · 2024: 246 · 2023: 236 · 2022: 236 · 2021: 245 · 2020: 201 · 2019: 113 · 2018: 15
FWCI
209.45
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geology › 3D Surveying and Cultural Heritage
Keywords
point cloud semantic segmentation, graph convolutional networks, large-scale point clouds, LiDAR scanning, outdoor point clouds, indoor point clouds

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review