OpenOccupancy: A Large Scale Benchmark for Surrounding Semantic Occupancy Perception
Open accessAbstract
Semantic occupancy perception is essential for autonomous driving, as automated vehicles require a fine-grained perception of the 3D urban structures. However, existing relevant benchmarks lack diversity in urban scenes, and they only evaluate front-view predictions. Towards a comprehensive benchmarking of surrounding perception algorithms, we propose OpenOccupancy, which is the first surrounding semantic occupancy perception benchmark. In the OpenOccupancy benchmark, we extend the large-scale nuScenes dataset with dense semantic occupancy annotations. Previous annotations rely on LiDAR points superimposition, where some occupancy labels are missed due to sparse LiDAR channels. To mitigate the problem, we introduce the Augmenting And Purifying (AAP) pipeline to ~ 2× densify the annotations, where ∼4000 human hours are involved in the labeling process. Besides, camera-based, LiDAR-based and multi-modal baselines are established for the OpenOccupancy benchmark. Furthermore, considering the complexity of surrounding occupancy perception lies in the computational burden of high-resolution 3D predictions, we propose the Cascade Occupancy Network (CONet) to refine the coarse prediction, which relatively enhances the performance by ∼30% than the baseline. We hope the OpenOccupancy benchmark‡will boost the development of surrounding occupancy perception algorithms.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
VQA-GNN introduces a shared context node to bridge visual and conceptual subgraphs, facilitating bidirectional message passing to mitigate modality-level representational gaps.
“VQA-GNN [66] exemplifies this approach by introducing a shared context node to bridge visual and conceptual subgraphs, facilitating bidirectional message passing to mitigate modality-level representational gaps.”
From Multimodal fusion and vision–language models: A survey for robot vision (2026) · cites this paper as [66]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 51 · Cited by 192
- Authors
- Wang, X., Zhu, Z., Xu, W., Zhang, Y., Wei, Y., Chi, X., Ye, Y., Du, D., Lu, J., & Wang, X.
- Affiliations
- Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
- PhiGent Robotics
- Tsinghua University (CN)
- Venue
- 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2023-10-01
- Pages
- 17804-17813
- OpenAlex
- W4390872638
- Cited by
- 192
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 43 · 2025: 80 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 5
- FWCI
- 59.84
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Vision and Imaging
- Keywords
- autonomous driving, benchmark, nuScenes, LiDAR, camera-based perception, multisensory perception
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