Cited by 105Advanced Neural Network Applications3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisDomain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning

Are We Hungry for 3D LiDAR Data for Semantic Segmentation? A Survey of Datasets and Methods

Gao, Biao, Pan, Yancheng, Li, Chengkun, Geng, Sibo, Zhao, Huijing·2022·IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems

Abstract

3D semantic segmentation is a fundamental task for robotic and autonomous driving applications. Recent works have been focused on using deep learning techniques, whereas developing fine-annotated 3D LiDAR datasets is extremely labor intensive and requires professional skills. The performance limitation caused by insufficient datasets is called data hunger problem. This research provides a comprehensive survey on the question: are we hungry for 3D LiDAR data for semantic segmentation? The studies are conducted at three levels. First, a broad review to the main 3D LiDAR datasets is conducted, followed by a statistical analysis on three representative datasets to gain an in-depth view on the datasets’ size, diversity and quality, which are the critical factors in learning deep models. Second, an organized survey of 3D semantic segmentation methods is given with a focus on the mainstream of the latest research trend using deep learning techniques, followed by a systematic survey to the existing efforts to solve the data hunger problem. Finally, an insightful discussion of the remaining problems on both methodological and datasets’ viewpoints, and the open questions on dataset bias, domain and semantic gap are given, leading to potential topics in future works. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work to study the data hunger problem for 3D semantic segmentation using deep learning techniques, which are addressed in both methodological and dataset review, and we share findings and discussions through a comprehensive dataset analysis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tits.2021.3076844

Cites

203 of 203 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

14 of the 217 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gao, B., Pan, Y., Li, C., Geng, S., & Zhao, H.
Affiliations
Peking University (CN)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems
Published
2022-07
Volume
23
Issue
7
Pages
6063-6081
ISSN
  • 1524-9050 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-0016
OpenAlex
W3160425077
Cited by
105
References
217
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 1
FWCI
5.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Development Program of China (2017YFB1002601)
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (61973004)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Domain Adaptation and Few-Shot Learning
Keywords
3D semantic segmentation, 3D LiDAR, dataset quality, data bias, domain gap, semantic gap, autonomous driving, robotics, deep learning

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