Reliable 3D dynamic perception requires models that can anticipate motion beyond predefined categories, yet progress is hindered by the scarcity of dense, high-quality motion annotations. While self-supervision on unlabeled real data offers a path forward, empirical evidence suggests that scaling unlabeled data fails to close the performance gap due to noisy proxy signals. In this paper, we propose learning robust real-world motion priors entirely from scalable simulation. We introduce SynFlow, a data generation pipeline for large-scale synthetic LiDAR scene flow. Unlike prior works that prioritize sensor-specific realism, SynFlow employs a motion-oriented strategy to synthesize diverse kinematic patterns across 4,000 sequences (∼940k frames), termed SynFlow-4k. This represents a 34× scale-up in annotated volume over existing real-world benchmarks. Our experiments demonstrate that SynFlow-4k provides a highly domain-invariant motion prior. In a zero-shot regime, models trained only on our synthetic data generalize across multiple real-world benchmarks, comparable to in-domain supervised baselines on nuScenes and outperforming state-of-the-art methods on TruckScenes by 31.8%. Furthermore, SynFlow-4k serves as a label-efficient foundation: fine-tuning with only 5% of real-world labels surpasses models trained from scratch on the full available budget. We open-source the pipeline and dataset to facilitate research in generalizable 3D motion estimation. More detail can be found at https://kin-zhang.github.io/SynFlow.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Scaling up LiDAR Scene Flow with Synthetic Data. We present SynFlow, a data generation pipeline leveraging the CARLA simulator to synthesize diverse, perfectly labeled LiDAR scene flow data (center). While real-world datasets are often constrained by high annotation costs and limited scenario diversity, SynFlow provides a scalable source of dense, noise-free supervision for learning robust motion priors. As shown in the results (right), models trained on SynFlow dataset achieve strong zero-shot generalization on real-world benchmarks and significantly outperform in-domain baselines when fine-tuned on a small subset of real data.
Figure 2: Overview of our SynFlow pipeline and dataset examples. Left: A CARLA world provides diverse road topologies; we construct a route bank using topology-aware coverage to ensure broad spatial exploration and execute rollouts under Traffic Management (TM). Middle: our procedural data engine instantiates an ego vehicle with configurable LiDAR, spawns surrounding agents with controllable policies, and runs synchronized simulation steps; Right: Representative frames showing raw LiDAR point clouds alongside corresponding dense scene flow labels, spanning diverse traffic interactions and motion regimes.
Split
#Annotated Frames
Composition
Scenarios
1k
271,148
Town06, 07, 10
arterials, complex junctions, rural roads
2k
449,407
Town01–05
roundabouts, multi-lane intersections
3k
720,555
1k + 2k
(1k + 2k)
4k
939,083
2k + Town12
mixed zones (urban/suburban/rural)
Table 1: Summary of SynFlow-4k data splits. Scaling annotated volume via rollouts across CARLA towns and route banks. Training sets comprise mixed 32/64-beam LiDAR sequences.
Methods
Supervision
Dynamic Bucket-Normalized ↓
Three-way EPE (cm) ↓
Mean
CAR
OTHER
PED.
VRU
Mean
FD
FS
BS
Ego Motion Flow
–
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
12.34
35.94
1.07
0.00
Self-supervised (100% unlabeled real-world data)
SeFlow [ 45 ]
100% unlab.
0.544
0.396
0.635
0.726
0.419
8.19
16.15
3.97
4.45
VoteFlow [ 18 ]
100% unlab.
0.538
0.355
0.605
0.780
0.410
7.80
15.65
3.51
4.24
SeFlow++ [ 43 ]
100% unlab.
0.509
0.327
0.583
0.716
0.409
6.13
14.59
1.96
1.86
Table 2: Performance on the nuScenes validation set. Supervision : unlab. = self-supervised on unlabeled real sequences; lab. = supervised on available (20%) labeled real data; synth. = supervised on SynFlow synthetic data only (no real data). Bold denotes the best result in each column.
Methods
Supervision
Dynamic Bucket-Normalized ↓
Three-way EPE (cm) ↓
Mean
CAR
OTHER
PED.
VRU
Mean
FD
FS
BS
Ego Motion Flow
–
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
61.43
184.30
0.00
0.00
Self-supervised (100% unlabeled real-world data)
SeFlow [ 45 ]
100% unlab.
0.681
0.494
0.752
0.886
0.591
37.41
103.97
1.56
6.68
VoteFlow [ 18 ]
100% unlab.
0.680
0.517
0.737
0.895
0.573
36.47
103.48
1.29
4.64
SeFlow++ [ 43 ]
100% unlab.
0.653
0.519
0.738
0.860
0.497
33.35
95.62
1.20
3.23
Table 3: Performance on the TruckScenes validation set. TruckScenes features large commercial vehicles with distinct LiDAR configurations unseen during SynFlow pre-training, providing a stringent test of cross-domain zero-shot generalization. Notation follows Tab. 2 .
Figure 3: Zero-shot scaling performance (1k–4k sequences). Evaluation on Aeva (a) and TruckScenes (b) using Dynamic Bucket-Normalized EPE (lower is better). Solid blue line indicates the overall mean; dashed lines represent per-category breakdowns.
Methods
Real labels
Mean
CAR
OTHER
PED.
VRU
nuScenes validation set
Δ Flow [ 46 ]
20%
0.216
0.138
0.219
0.327
0.181
SynFlow-4k (Zero-shot)
0%
0.242
0.177
0.307
0.300
0.183
SynFlow-4k + FT
5%
0.201
0.151
0.240
0.272
0.139
SynFlow-4k + FT
10%
0.175
0.127
0.201
0.253
0.119
SynFlow-4k + FT
20%
0.157
0.110
0.173
0.247
0.098
Table 4: Fine-tuning scaling on nuScenes (upper) and TruckScenes (lower). Comparison between from-scratch supervised baselines and SynFlow-4k across varying real-world label budgets. Zero-shot (0%) denotes purely synthetic supervision; +FT rows indicate fine-tuning on the specified real-world fraction. Bold denotes best per column.
Training data
Dynamic Bucket-Normalized ↓
Three-way EPE (cm) ↓
Mean
CAR
OTHER
PED.
VRU
Mean
FD
FS
BS
UniFlow only
0.303
0.112
0.359
0.398
0.344
6.65
13.17
5.16
1.62
SynFlow-4k only
0.288
0.166
0.430
0.248
0.309
9.08
21.41
4.88
0.94
Both
0.263
0.102
0.401
0.251
0.298
5.95
13.15
3.85
0.84
Table 5: Complementarity of SynFlow-4k and UniFlow. Zero-shot evaluation on the Aeva dataset. UniFlow [ 16 ] is trained on merged real-world data (Argo-v2 [ 36 ] , nuScenes, Waymo). Combining synthetic and real-world sources consistently outperforms individual training.
P1: Topology
P2: Speed
Dynamic Bucket-Normalized ↓
Three-way EPE (cm) ↓
Mean
CAR
OTHER
PED.
VRU
Mean
FD
FS
BS
0.346
0.225
0.512
0.311
0.334
18.96
52.34
3.51
1.02
✓
0.331
0.211
0.487
0.282
0.342
18.45
51.25
3.10
1.01
✓
0.330
0.215
0.501
0.281
0.324
17.89
50.21
2.82
0.65
✓
✓
0.319
0.201
0.488
0.270
0.317
17.11
48.17
2.52
0.66
Table 6: Ablation of data generation design choices (1k sequences trained), zero-shot evaluated on Aeva dataset. “Topology Coverage (Policy 1)” toggles greedy lane-segment coverage route bank; otherwise, random-start fixed-length routes are used. “Speed Regime (Policy 2)” toggles whether highway-structured towns (Town04, Town06, Town07) are included; otherwise only urban towns are used.
Backbone
Dynamic Bucket-Normalized ↓
Three-way EPE (cm) ↓
MEAN
CAR
OTHER
PED.
VRU
Mean
FD
FS
BS
Ego Motion Flow
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
1.000
44.31
132.00
0.92
0.00
Trained on SynFlow-4k
DeFlow
0.426
0.249
0.514
0.448
0.500
10.99
25.85
6.60
0.84
Flow4D
0.308
0.173
0.452
0.286
0.320
9.37
21.87
6.00
0.94
Δ Flow
0.288
0.166
0.430
0.248
0.309
9.08
21.41
4.88
0.94
Table 7: Ablation of backbone architectures. Zero-shot evaluation on Aeva after training on SynFlow-4k dataset. The consistent improvement across different estimators demonstrates the backbone-agnostic transferability of our synthetic supervision.
Figure 4: Dataset visualization. Top: SynFlow-4k samples under 64-beam (row 1) and 32-beam (row 2) configurations, spanning city, roundabout, highway, and merging scenarios. Per-point scene flow labels are rendered as colored vectors. Direction is encoded as hue, and magnitude as saturation. Bottom: representative samples from real-world datasets (nuScenes and TruckScene).
LiDAR scene flow is the task of estimating per-point 3D motion between consecutive point clouds. Recent methods achieve centimeter-level accuracy on popular autonomous vehicle (AV) datasets, but are typically only trained and evaluated on a single sensor. In this paper, we aim to learn general motion priors that transfer to diverse and unseen LiDAR sensors. However, prior work in LiDAR semantic segmentation and 3D object detection demonstrate that naively training on multiple datasets yields worse performance than single dataset models. Interestingly, we find that this conventional wisdom does not hold for motion estimation, and that state-of-the-art scene flow methods greatly benefit from cross-dataset training without architectural modification. We posit that low-level tasks such as motion estimation may be less sensitive to sensor configuration; indeed, our analysis shows that models trained on fast-moving objects (e.g., from highway datasets) perform well on fast-moving objects, even across different datasets. Informed by our analysis, we propose UniFlow, a feedforward model that unifies and trains on multiple large-scale LiDAR scene flow datasets with diverse sensor placements and point cloud densities. Our frustratingly simple solution establishes a new state-of-the-art on Waymo and nuScenes, improving over prior work by 5.1% and 35.2% respectively. Moreover, UniFlow achieves state-of-the-art accuracy on unseen datasets like TruckScenes and AEVAScenes, outperforming prior dataset-specific models by 30.1% and 22.5% respectively.
Siyi Li, Qingwen Zhang, Ishan Khatri +4
University of Pennsylvania · KTH Royal Institute of Technology · StackAV +1
Motions of objects and scenes carry essential intelligence in video understanding, offering rich cues for interpreting dynamic settings and interactions. Due to the cost and scarcity of high-quality annotation or ground truth of pixel-wise optical flow, however, motion estimation models are typically trained in synthetic domains while deployed in real-world domains. Addressing synthetic-to-real domain generalization challenges has been crucial for developing practical solutions in diverse open-world use cases. This paper introduces SciFlow, a simple yet effective, network-agnostic, training-based approach that leverages self-supervised learning to generalize motion estimation across synthetic and open-world domains. Specifically, SciFlow imposes semantic interference from open-world images onto synthetic images during training, blending indomain features with cross-domain interference, which enables the network to adapt to the real-world domains. Additionally, SciFlow utilizes geometric consistency to ensure validity of the self-supervision. Our experiment results show that SciFlow not only significantly enhances model robustness amidst domain variations, but also remarkably enables synthetic-to-real domain generalization without requiring any ground truth in the open world.
Jamie Menjay Lin, Jisoo Jeong, Hong Cai +2
1Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. · 2Qualcomm AI Research†
Current feed-forward 3D/4D reconstruction systems rely on dense geometry and pose supervision -- expensive to obtain at scale and particularly scarce for dynamic real-world scenes. We present Flow3r, a framework that augments visual geometry learning with dense 2D correspondences (`flow') as supervision, enabling scalable training from unlabeled monocular videos. Our key insight is that the flow prediction module should be factored: predicting flow between two images using geometry latents from one and pose latents from the other. This factorization directly guides the learning of both scene geometry and camera motion, and naturally extends to dynamic scenes. In controlled experiments, we show that factored flow prediction outperforms alternative designs and that performance scales consistently with unlabeled data. Integrating factored flow into existing visual geometry architectures and training with ∼800K unlabeled videos, Flow3r achieves state-of-the-art results across eight benchmarks spanning static and dynamic scenes, with its largest gains on in-the-wild dynamic videos where labeled data is most scarce.