HP2-SLAM: Adaptive Hybrid ICP for Robust and Efficient LiDAR SLAM
Organizations: Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA · VinRobotics · Department of Computer Science, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, USA
Abstract
Achieving robustness, accuracy, and efficiency simultaneously remains a central challenge in light detection and ranging (LiDAR) simultaneous localization and mapping (SLAM). While learning-based approaches deliver strong benchmark performance, they often require extensive training, substantial computational resources, and struggle to generalize to unseen or degenerate environments. Geometry-based methods are efficient and interpretable, yet their performance degrades in planar or repetitive scenes due to limitations of standard iterative closest point (ICP) formulations. We present HP2-SLAM, a minimalist yet robust LiDAR SLAM framework built around a neighborhood-size adaptive hybrid ICP. Our key insight is a planarity-aware adaptive threshold that dynamically classifies correspondences based on local geometric structure and density, thereby enabling a principled balance between point-to-plane and point-to-point residuals. This formulation stabilizes alignment in both structured and degenerate environments without feature engineering, learning modules, or dataset-specific tuning. Integrated into a complete SLAM pipeline with submap management, loop closure detection, and pose graph optimization, HP2-SLAM consistently outperforms strong geometry-based baselines across publicly available datasets while maintaining real-time performance on commodity hardware. Our results demonstrate that carefully designed geometric adaptation can achieve strong generalization and robustness without sacrificing simplicity or efficiency.
Figures & tables
| Method | KAIST | DCC | Riverside | Sejong |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | |
| KISS-SLAM [ 8 ] | 2.96 | 3.68 | 8.34 | 178.34 |
| PIN-SLAM [ 30 ] | 2.42 | 3.57 | 7.55 | 782.96 |
| CT-ICP [ 14 ] | 2.76 | 4.03 | 8.37 | - |
| MULLS [ 11 ] | 34.21 | 27.30 | 66.60 | 1082.55 |
| HP 2 -SLAM (ours) | 2.71 | 3.56 | 7.50 | 146.51 |
| KITTI-corrected | 00 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | AVG |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | |
| KISS-SLAM [ 8 ] | 0.89 | 3.11 | 1.92 | 0.67 | 0.38 | 0.67 | 0.32 | 0.33 | 2.55 | 1.25 | 0.71 | 1.16 |
| GenZ-ICP [ 13 ] | 5.19 | 25.47 | 11.19 | 3.27 | 0.90 | 1.50 | 0.86 | 0.67 | 4.46 | 3.07 | 2.32 | 5.36 |
| HP 2 -SLAM (ours) | 0.85 | 2.75 | 1.89 | 0.51 | 0.24 | 0.56 | 0.31 | 0.31 | 2.40 | 1.15 | 0.69 | 1.06 |
| Method | Bridge | Bridge | Bridge | Round | Round | Round | Town | Town | Town |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aeva | Avia | Ouster | Aeva | Avia | Ouster | Aeva | Avia | Ouster | |
| KISS-SLAM [ 8 ] | 98.61 | 148.88 | 19.47 | 6.06 | 3.84 | 1.18 | 14.44 | 12.01 | 1.99 |
| PIN-SLAM [ 30 ] | - | 365.72 | 19.23 | - | 7.02 | 1.47 | 41.19 | 11.40 | 2.55 |
| CT-ICP [ 14 ] | - | 41.47 | 576.62 | 10.04 | 3.36 | 1.81 | 65.29 | 63.72 | - |
| MULLS [ 11 ] | 365.06 | 321.87 | 52.65 | 19.08 | 16.39 | 2.65 | 39.82 | 14.93 | 4.45 |
| HP 2 -SLAM (ours) | 57.37 | 26.77 | 17.51 | 5.77 | 3.17 | 1.08 | 11.65 | 10.45 | 1.91 |
| Method | BTS | CP | H237 | MAVE | SB | SJD | SJD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-10-12 | 2018-10-11 | 2018-10-12 | 2018-10-12 | 2018-10-03 | 2018-10-11 (1) | 2018-10-11 (2) | |
| KISS-SLAM [ 8 ] | 3.07 | 0.78 | 25.02 | 12.7 | 2.40 | 1.96 | 0.73 |
| PIN-SLAM [ 30 ] | 6.10 | 0.64 | 97.11 | 7.06 | 2.23 | 1.86 | 1.15 |
| CT-ICP [ 14 ] | 10.81 | 0.97 | 258.87 | 61.39 | 667.28 | 0.78 | 1.09 |
| MULLS [ 11 ] | 104.14 | 47.03 | 354.21 | 182.59 | - | 13.38 | 11.41 |
| HP 2 -SLAM (ours) | 2.63 | 0.64 | 24.41 | 4.01 | 2.07 | 1.46 | 0.63 |
| Method | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | ATE (m) | |
| GenZ-ICP [ 13 ] | 4.72 | 17.21 | 15.41 | 3.55 | 0.64 | 1.62 | 1.16 | 0.73 | 5.62 | 3.64 | 2.16 |
| Point-to-point only | 3.50 | 3.15 | 6.46 | 0.52 | 0.31 | 1.49 | 0.42 | 0.31 | 2.20 | 1.31 | 0.71 |
| Point-to-plane only | 3.96 | 2.49 | 6.63 | 0.60 | 2.41 | 1.45 | 0.40 | 0.39 | 2.41 | 0.88 | 0.79 |
| Adaptive hybrid (ours) | 3.46 | 2.70 | 6.64 | 0.51 | 0.31 | 1.32 | 0.41 | 0.30 | 2.19 | 1.14 | 0.67 |
| KITTI-corrected | Neighbor Search | PCA | ICP | Backend | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sequence 00 | 5.92 | 1.69 | 0.91 | 8.72 | 17.24 |
| Sequence 01 | 8.68 | 2.50 | 1.07 | 11.36 | 23.61 |
| Sequence 02 | 5.70 | 1.65 | 0.85 | 9.48 | 17.68 |
| Sequence 03 | 8.37 | 2.4 | 1.06 | 9.91 | 21.74 |
| Sequence 04 | 7.01 | 1.98 | 0.97 | 11.24 | 21.20 |
| Sequence 05 | 5.95 | 1.71 | 0.86 | 9.56 | 18.08 |
Simultaneous Localization and Mapping
Simultaneous localization and mapping estimates a robot’s motion while building a map of an unknown environment.
See all 196 papers