Cited by 46Autonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsAdvanced Vision and Imaging

Real-Time 3D Object Detection and Classification in Autonomous Driving Environment Using 3D LiDAR and Camera Sensors

Open access
Arikumar, K. S., Deepak Kumar, A., Gadekallu, Thippa Reddy, Prathiba, Sahaya Beni, Tamilarasi, K.·2022·Electronics

Abstract

The rapid development of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) increases the requirement for the accurate prediction of objects in the vicinity to guarantee safer journeys. For effectively predicting objects, sensors such as Three-Dimensional Light Detection and Ranging (3D LiDAR) and cameras can be used. The 3D LiDAR sensor captures the 3D shape of the object and produces point cloud data that describes the geometrical structure of the object. The LiDAR-only detectors may be subject to false detection or even non-detection over objects located at high distances. The camera sensor captures RGB images with sufficient attributes that describe the distinct identification of the object. The high-resolution images produced by the camera sensor benefit the precise classification of the objects. However, hindrances such as the absence of depth information from the images, unstructured point clouds, and cross modalities affect assertion and boil down the environmental perception. To this end, this paper proposes an object detection mechanism that fuses the data received from the camera sensor and the 3D LiDAR sensor (OD-C3DL). The 3D LiDAR sensor obtains point clouds of the object such as distance, position, and geometric shape. The OD-C3DL employs Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) for further processing point clouds obtained from the 3D LiDAR sensor and the camera sensor to recognize the objects effectively. The point cloud of the LiDAR is enhanced and fused with the image space on the Regions of Interest (ROI) for easy recognition of the objects. The evaluation results show that the OD-C3DL can provide an average of 89 real-time objects for a frame and reduces the extraction time by a recall rate of 94%. The average processing time is 65ms, which makes the OD-C3DL model incredibly suitable for the AVs perception. Furthermore, OD-C3DL provides mean accuracy for identifying automobiles and pedestrians at a moderate degree of difficulty is higher than that of the previous models at 79.13% and 88.76%.

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 · 10.3390/electronics11244203

Cites

44 of 44 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

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?

  • Shape-based object detection uses computer vision algorithms to analyze the shapes and contours of objects in video footage, enabling detection and classification of specific objects of interest.

    “Shape-based object detection in video surveillance uses computer vision algorithms to analyze the shapes and contours of objects that are captured in video footage, which enables the detection and classification of specific objects of interest.”

    From A Survey of Video Surveillance Systems in Smart City (2023) · cites this paper as [77]

    The Introduction and Section 3.3 describe camera images, CNN-based feature extraction, and object detection and classification. But the paper concerns autonomous driving and combines camera data with LiDAR data for geometric shape information; it does not describe analyzing shapes and contours in video-surveillance footage. Page numbers are not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Arikumar, K. S., Deepak Kumar, A., Gadekallu, T. R., Prathiba, S. B., & Tamilarasi, K.
Affiliations
  • School of Computer Science and Engineering, VIT-AP University, Vijayawada 522237, India
  • Department of Computer Science and Engineering, St. Joseph’s Institute of Technology, Chennai 600119, India
  • Lebanese American University (LB)
  • Vellore Institute of Technology University (IN)
Corresponding author
Prathiba, Sahaya Beni
Venue
Electronics
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-12-16
Volume
11
Issue
24
Pages
4203
ISSN
2079-9292 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4313293021
Cited by
46
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15
FWCI
2.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Electronics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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
3D object detection, autonomous vehicles, 3D LiDAR, point clouds, real-time object detection, cross-modal fusion, region of interest, environmental perception, convolutional neural networks

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