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.
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