Fast Attention-Based Simplification of LiDAR Point Clouds for Object Detection and Classification
Authors: Z. Rozsa, Á. Madaras, Q. Wei, X. Lu, M. Golarits, H. Yuan, T. Sziranyi, R. Hamzaoui
Organizations: Institute for Computer Science and Control (SZTAKI), Budapest, Hungary · School of Information Engineering, Nanchang University, Nanchang, China · Faculty of Technology, Arts, and Culture, De Montfort University, Leicester, U.K. · School of Control Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, China
LiDAR point clouds are widely used in autonomous driving and consist of large numbers of 3D points captured at high frequency to represent surrounding objects such as vehicles, pedestrians, and traffic signs. While this dense data enables accurate perception, it also increases computational cost and power consumption, which can limit real-time deployment. Existing point cloud sampling methods typically face a trade-off: very fast approaches tend to reduce accuracy, while more accurate methods are computationally expensive. To address this limitation, we propose an efficient learned point cloud simplification method for LiDAR data. The method combines a feature embedding module with an attention-based sampling module to prioritize task-relevant regions and is trained end-to-end. We evaluate the method against farthest point sampling (FPS) and random sampling (RS) on 3D object detection on the KITTI dataset and on object classification across four datasets. The method was consistently faster than FPS and achieved similar, and in some settings better, accuracy, with the largest gains under aggressive downsampling. It was slower than RS, but it typically preserved accuracy more reliably at high sampling ratios.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : CAS-Net Architecture.
Fig. 2 : Overview of ASM.
Method
D=1
D=2
D=4
D=8
mAP
mAP
Time
mAP
Time
mAP
Time
RS
64.46
53.12
0.001
37.45
0.001
22.22
0.001
FPS
64.46
62.24
0.144
49.85
0.075
20.94
0.041
CAS-Net
64.46
61.79
0.072
56.74
0.038
47.97
0.029
TABLE I: Comparison of 3D Object Detection Performance (Moderate mAP %) and downsampling time (s) on the KITTI validation set.
Fig. 3 : Qualitative comparison of 3D object detection under different downsampling strategies and ratios. The top row shows the full-resolution reference and the scene context.
Method
Input points
Output points
OA
k
Execution time (s)
Acc
Prec
Rec
F1
per batch
per sample
CAS-Net Ball query
1024
512
1
1
0.019459
0.001624
89.51%
84.21%
85.23%
0.8435
1024
256
1
1
0.015566
0.001299
89.47%
84.92%
85.95%
0.8511
1024
128
1
1
0.015298
0.001277
88.90%
85.04%
85.31%
0.8484
1024
512
3
32
0.049871
0.004896
89.38%
85.54%
85.42%
0.8490
1024
256
3
32
0.044244
0.003693
89.42%
84.80%
85.33%
0.8478
TABLE II : Performance comparaison of CAS-Net with FPS and RS on ModelNet40. OA denotes the number of OA layers, and k denotes the number of neighboring points. Performance metrics are accuracy (Acc), precision (Prec), recall (Rec), and F1-score.
Method
Input points
Output points
OA
k
Execution time (s)
Acc
Prec
Rec
F1
per batch
per sample
CAS-Net Ball query
1024
512
1
1
0.036872
0.003117
95.88%
95.50%
90.45%
0.9189
1024
256
1
1
0.030619
0.002588
95.88%
92.73%
90.26%
0.9070
1024
128
1
1
0.027265
0.002305
94.43%
87.64%
88.48%
0.8777
1024
512
3
32
0.062607
0.005293
96.08%
93.22%
92.17%
0.9219
1024
256
3
32
0.058407
0.004937
95.05%
92.62%
91.41%
0.9151
TABLE III : Performance comparaison of CAS-Net with FPS and RS on KITTI. OA denotes the number of OA layers, and k denotes the number of neighboring points. Performance metrics are accuracy (Acc), precision (Prec), recall (Rec), and F1-score.
Method
Input points
Output points
OA
k
Execution time (s)
Acc
Prec
Rec
F1
per batch
per sample
CAS-Net Ball query
1024
512
1
1
0.052503
0.004428
69.71%
65.22%
62.14%
0.6286
1024
256
1
1
0.042908
0.003619
69.54%
68.16%
62.64%
0.6394
1024
128
1
1
0.040196
0.003390
68.16%
62.97%
60.34%
0.6056
1024
512
3
32
0.119326
0.010064
69.54%
67.37%
60.86%
0.6199
1024
256
3
32
0.111203
0.009379
68.33%
65.63%
59.82%
0.6096
TABLE IV : Performance comparaison of CAS-Net with FPS and RS on KITTI. OA denotes the number of OA layers, and k denotes the number of neighboring points. Performance metrics are accuracy (Acc), precision (Prec), recall (Rec), and F1-score.
Method
Input points
Output points
OA
k
Execution time (s)
Acc
Prec
Rec
F1
per batch
per sample
CAS-Net Ball query
1024
512
1
1
0.036097
0.003069
84.12%
72.70%
75.96%
0.7292
1024
256
1
1
0.033790
0.002873
85.01%
73.90%
72.82%
0.7115
1024
128
1
1
0.029574
0.002514
84.56%
72.78%
72.94%
0.7056
1024
512
3
32
0.062459
0.005310
85.01%
67.70%
72.42%
0.6764
1024
256
3
32
0.059424
0.005052
85.68%
73.77%
76.16%
0.7381
TABLE V : Performance comparison of CAS-Net with FPS and RS on ESTATE. OA denotes the number of OA layers, and k denotes the number of neighboring points. Performance metrics are accuracy (Acc), precision (Prec), recall (Rec), and F1-score.
Lidar-based 3D object detection locates and classifies objects in point clouds, supporting perception for autonomous vehicles, robots, and other mobile systems.
3D object detection from LiDAR point clouds faces a fundamental dilemma: voxel-based methods achieve efficiency at the cost of geometric quantization, while point-based methods preserve fidelity but suffer from prohibitive computational bottlenecks. Specifically, point-based architectures are crippled by slow downsampling strategies (e.g., FPS) and expensive dynamic neighbor queries (e.g., k-NN) coupled with costly continuous interactions. To tackle these systemic inefficiencies, we propose PointLAM, a highly efficient and powerful point-based architecture driven by two synergistic innovations. First, to resolve the downsampling bottleneck, we develop the Laplacian Point Sampler (LPS). LPS employs an implicit discrete Laplacian high-pass filter and Doubly Sorted Sampling to achieve fast, structure-aware foreground preservation. Second, to overcome local modeling latency, we design the Local Hadamard Aggregator (LHA). LHA decouples spatial indexing from feature representation using transient grids, and replaces complex continuous interactions with a Hadamard Gating mechanism for topology-aware, attentive modulation. By coupling this local gating with Bi-Directional Mamba (BDM) layers for global sequence modeling, we formulate the Local Attentive Mamba (LAM) block. Powered by this architecture, PointLAM achieves competitive performance on nuScenes and Waymo for point-based detectors. It rivals highly optimized voxel competitors while requiring a fraction of the computational footprint, demonstrating marked superiority in detecting small instances and handling extreme sparsity. Project page: https://pointlam.github.io/.
Xuanming Shang, Weijia Zhang, Chao Ma
MoE Key Lab of Artificial Intelligence, Institute of AI, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China
Three-dimensional (3D) point cloud analysis has become central to applications ranging from autonomous driving and robotics to forestry and ecological monitoring. Although numerous deep learning methods have been proposed for point cloud understanding, including supervised backbones, self-supervised pre-training (SSL), and parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT), their implementations are scattered across incompatible codebases with differing data pipelines, evaluation protocols, and configuration formats, making fair comparisons difficult. We introduce \lib{}, a unified, extensible PyTorch library that integrates over 55 model configurations covering 29 supervised architectures, seven SSL pre-training methods, and five PEFT strategies, all within a single registry-based framework supporting classification, semantic segmentation, part segmentation, and few-shot learning. \lib{} provides standardised training runners, cross-validation with stratified K-fold splitting, automated LaTeX/CSV table generation, built-in Friedman/Nemenyi statistical testing with critical-difference diagrams for rigorous multi-model comparison, and a comprehensive test suite with 2,200+ automated tests validating every configuration end-to-end. The code is available at https://github.com/said-ohamouddou/LIDARLearn under the MIT licence.
Said Ohamouddou, Hanaa El Afia, Abdellatif El Afia +1
LiDAR-based 3D object detection is a core perception service for autonomous driving, but deployment requires robustness to point-cloud corruption while meeting latency and memory requirements. Existing approaches address robustness and resource efficiency separately, resulting in compact detectors that are fragile under corruption or robust detectors that remain costly to deploy. We therefore formulate LiDAR perception provisioning as constructing a detector that remains accurate under point-cloud corruptions while meeting constraints on inference latency and peak GPU memory. To achieve robustness, we first craft corrupted samples that mimic extreme weather conditions. Then we train candidate detectors offline by ordering clean and corrupted samples by perturbation sensitivity, through which detectors learn more from hard corrupted samples. We estimate perturbation sensitivity using an ensemble of seven heterogeneous 3D detectors by tracking changes in confidence, BEV overlap, and unmatched detections. To improve efficiency, we narrow the network and use offline neighborhood-density measurements to determine how many points and neighbors each sampling stage processes. We evaluate our method using AP (Average Precision) under clean and corrupted conditions, inference latency, and peak allocated GPU memory. On KITTI for Car detection with PointRCNN, our method improves Moderate AP under corruption by 3.32 points over the original detector while reducing mean latency by 19.8% and peak allocated GPU memory by 53.9%. Across two datasets, two detector architectures, and three object classes, our method improves AP under corruption by 4.03 points on average over the corresponding original detectors, while reducing mean inference latency and peak allocated GPU memory by 14.4% and 38.0%, respectively. Our code is available at https://github.com/drunklibai/robust-efficient-lidar-perception.
Tingxu Han, Zijie Shen, An Guo +4
State Key Laboratory for Novel Software Technology, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China. · Department of Computing, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China · School of Science and Engineering, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, China +1