The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
SemanticKITTI: A Dataset for Semantic Scene Understanding of LiDAR Sequences
Open accessAbstract
Semantic scene understanding is important for various applications. In particular, self-driving cars need a fine-grained understanding of the surfaces and objects in their vicinity. Light detection and ranging (LiDAR) provides precise geometric information about the environment and is thus a part of the sensor suites of almost all self-driving cars. Despite the relevance of semantic scene understanding for this application, there is a lack of a large dataset for this task which is based on an automotive LiDAR. In this paper, we introduce a large dataset to propel research on laser-based semantic segmentation. We annotated all sequences of the KITTI Vision Odometry Benchmark and provide dense point-wise annotations for the complete 360-degree field-of-view of the employed automotive LiDAR. We propose three benchmark tasks based on this dataset: (i) semantic segmentation of point clouds using a single scan, (ii) semantic segmentation using multiple past scans, and (iii) semantic scene completion, which requires to anticipate the semantic scene in the future. We provide baseline experiments and show that there is a need for more sophisticated models to efficiently tackle these tasks. Our dataset opens the door for the development of more advanced methods, but also provides plentiful data to investigate new research directions.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Additionally, SemanticKITTI [24] focuses on semantic segmentation of LiDAR point clouds and provides an important benchmark for sequence-level semantic scene completion.”
From Multimodal fusion and vision–language models: A survey for robot vision (2026) · cites this paper as [24]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
ImageNet: A large-scale hierarchical image database
Deng, J., Dong, W., Socher, R., Li, L.-J., Li, K., & Fei-Fei, L. (2009) · 2009 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2009.5206848 · Cited by 65,333
Chen, L.-C., Papandreou, G., Kokkinos, I., Murphy, K., & Yuille, A. L. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2017.2699184 · Cited by 22,392
Chen, L.-C., Papandreou, G., Kokkinos, I., Murphy, K., & Yuille, A. L. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1606.00915 · Cited by 22,392
YOLOv3: An Incremental Improvement
Redmon, J., & Farhadi, A. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1804.02767 · Cited by 17,141
Are we ready for autonomous driving? The KITTI vision benchmark suite
Geiger, A., Lenz, P., & Urtasun, R. (2012) · 2012 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2012.6248074 · Cited by 14,897
The Cityscapes Dataset for Semantic Urban Scene Understanding
Cordts, M., Omran, M., Ramos, S., Rehfeld, T., Enzweiler, M., Benenson, R., Franke, U., Roth, S., & Schiele, B. (2016) · 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2016.350 · Cited by 12,433
PointNet++: Deep Hierarchical Feature Learning on Point Sets in a Metric SpacePreprint
Qi, C. R., Yi, L., Su, H., & Guibas, L. J. (2017) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1706.02413 · Cited by 10,099
PointNet: Deep Learning on Point Sets for 3D Classification and Segmentation
Charles, R., Su, H., Mo, K., & Guibas, L. J. (2017) · IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings - IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition/Proceedings · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.16 · Cited by 10,029
The Pascal Visual Object Classes Challenge: A Retrospective
Everingham, M., Eslami, S. M. A., Van Gool, L., Williams, C. K. I., Winn, J., & Zisserman, A. (2015) · International Journal of Computer Vision · doi:10.1007/s11263-014-0733-5 · Cited by 7,139
Indoor segmentation and support inference from rgbd images
Silberman, N., Hoiem, D., Kohli, P., & Fergus, R. (2012) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33715-4_54 · Cited by 5,760
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- hua, 2018, Point-wise Convolutional Neural Networks, Proc of the IEEE Conf on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR)
- 10.1177/0278364918767506 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scalability in Perception for Autonomous Driving: Waymo Open Dataset
Sun, P., Kretzschmar, H., Dotiwalla, X., Chouard, A., Patnaik, V., Tsui, P., Guo, J., Zhou, Y., Chai, Y., Caine, B., et al. (2020) · 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.00252 · Cited by 3,437
Deep Learning for 3D Point Clouds: A Survey
Guo, Y., Wang, H., Hu, Q., Liu, H., Liu, L., & Bennamoun, M. (2020) · IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence · doi:10.1109/tpami.2020.3005434 · Cited by 2,575
RandLA-Net: Efficient Semantic Segmentation of Large-Scale Point Clouds
Hu, Q., Yang, B., Xie, L., Rosa, S., Guo, Y., Wang, Z., Trigoni, N., & Markham, A. (2020) · 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr42600.2020.01112 · Cited by 2,275
RangeNet ++: Fast and Accurate LiDAR Semantic Segmentation
Milioto, A., Vizzo, I., Behley, J., & Stachniss, C. (2019) · IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) · doi:10.1109/iros40897.2019.8967762 · Cited by 1,344
Self-citationLi, Y., & Ibanez-Guzman, J. (2020) · IEEE Signal Processing Magazine · doi:10.1109/msp.2020.2973615 · Cited by 900
Metadata
- Authors
- Behley, J., Garbade, M., Milioto, A., Quenzel, J., Behnke, S., Stachniss, C., & Gall, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Bonn (DE)
- Venue
- 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2019-10
- Pages
- 9296-9306
- OpenAlex
- W2965803762
- Cited by
- 2,294
- References
- 77
- Citations by year
- 2026: 249 · 2025: 457 · 2024: 520 · 2023: 423 · 2022: 286 · 2021: 236 · 2020: 110 · 2019: 11
- FWCI
- 52.41
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- TIB Data Manager
- Funders
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EXC-2070, FOR 1505, BE 5996/1-1, GA 1927/2-2, 390732324)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
- Keywords
- semantic scene understanding, LiDAR, point cloud semantic segmentation, automotive LiDAR, SemanticKITTI, point cloud annotation, semantic scene completion, autonomous driving, benchmark dataset
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
