Link to paper

The full paper is available here.

You can also find the paper on PapersWithCode here.

Abstract

  • Ground segmentation is an essential task for 3D perception using 3D LiDAR sensors.
  • Several ground segmentation methods have been proposed, but they have some limitations.
  • Patchwork++ is a robust ground segmentation method that addresses these limitations.
  • Patchwork++ uses adaptive ground likelihood estimation, temporal ground revert, region-wise vertical plane fitting, and reflected noise removal.

Paper Content

I. introduction

  • Mobile robots are increasingly being used to perform tasks in complex environments
  • 3D LiDAR sensors are used for detection, segmentation, localization, and 3D registration
  • Ground segmentation is an essential task for 3D perception
  • Machine learning has been applied to 3D perception
  • Potential limitations of learning-based methods include time-consuming labeling and degraded performance in different scenes
  • Non-learning-based ground segmentation should be fast, precise, and able to deal with uneven outdoor environments
  • Patchwork++ is proposed to address under-segmentation issues
  • Contributions include adaptive ground likelihood estimation, temporal ground revert, reflected noise removal, and region-wise vertical plane fitting

A. learning-based ground segmentation methods

  • Xu et al. proposed RPVNet, which ranked first on the SemanticKITTI leaderboard of semantic segmentation
  • Shen et al. proposed Jump-Convolution-Process to facilitate point cloud segmentation
  • Paigwar et al. proposed GndNet to estimate grid-wise ground elevation and segment ground and nonground points

B. conventional ground segmentation methods

  • Moosmann et al. proposed a 3D point cloud segmentation method
  • Himmelsbach et al. proposed a line-based ground segmentation method
  • Zermas et al. proposed a fast ground plane fitting (GPF)
  • Lim et al. proposed a concentric zone-based region-wise ground segmentation
  • Narksri et al. proposed a RANSAC-based ground segmentation with multiple regions
  • Jiménez et al. adopted the channel-based Markov random field
  • Under-segmentation is a problem that results in false negatives

C. applications of ground segmentation

  • Ground segmentation is used as a prior step for object recognition in object clustering methods.
  • Ground segmentation can improve computational efficiency and accuracy by eliminating ground points.
  • Ground segmentation is used in LiDAR odometry methods to obtain strong constraints.

Iii. patchwork++: fast, robust, and adaptive ground segmentation

  • Problem definition and rationale behind Patchwork++
  • Four parts proposed: RNR, R-VPF, A-GLE, and TGR

A. problem definition

  • Attempt to classify 3D point cloud into ground and non-ground classes
  • Ground segmentation method outputs estimated ground points
  • Actual ground points and non-ground points can be divided into true positives, false positives, false negatives, and true negatives
  • Objective is to estimate ground points with as many true positives as possible while rejecting false negatives and false positives

B. rnr: reflected noise removal

  • Noise points can be observed in raw point clouds
  • R-GPF can select initial seeds that trigger under-segmentation
  • Points with z value smaller than a user-defined threshold are filtered out
  • This can erase true ground points in steep slope environments
  • RNR leverages two key observations to discriminate between actual ground points and noise points
  • RNR rejects points with lower height and intensity than thresholds to remove noise points

C. r-vpf: region-wise vertical plane fitting

  • R-GPF sometimes fails to estimate an appropriate ground plane when the desired ground is above vertical urban structures.
  • This is because the points from the vertical structures have smaller z values than the actual ground points, so they are chosen as the initial seeds.
  • PCA-based estimation is sensitive to outlier points, which can lead to an unsuitable ground fitting result.

Point of incidence

  • Elevated ground should be considered as non-ground
  • Dynamic objects, such as humans, can still stand on that ground
  • R-VPF proposed to estimate more accurate ground planes
  • Points divided into multiple subsets in the polar coordinate
  • R-VPF selects seed points and estimates mean and unit normal vector
  • Points considered as vertical points in previous iterations are rejected in subsequent iterations
  • Total vertical points are estimated by accumulating all the vertical points

D. a-gle: adaptive ground likelihood estimation

  • Previous work used GLE to determine ground or non-ground
  • GLE determined by uprightness, elevation, and flatness indicator functions
  • Parameters need to be set depending on the environment
  • A-GLE updates parameters and noise removal height threshold in an adaptive manner

Vertical plane points

Ground plane points estimated ground points

  • R-VPF is applied for preprocessing to accurately estimate the ground plane
  • A novel concept of definite ground is proposed to update parameters
  • Elevation parameter is updated based on the set of estimated ground planes
  • Flatness parameter is updated based on the set of estimated ground planes
  • A-GLE stores the states from the previously estimated ground and updates parameters for the next estimation

E. tgr: temporal ground revert

  • A-GLE is used to estimate typical ground points.
  • Unusual ground points may not satisfy the parameters’ condition.
  • A-GLE acts as a low-pass filter, making it difficult to estimate the bin as ground.
  • TGR is proposed to revert the under-segmented ground planes into the segmented ground bins.
  • TGR compares each under-segmented bin’s f n with f t τ,m.

3d point cloud

Iv. experimental setup

A. dataset and error metrics

  • Experiments conducted using SemanticKITTI dataset
  • Ground points include road, parking, sidewalk, other ground, lane marking, and terrain
  • Points labeled as vegetation excluded from evaluation, but still included in input point cloud
  • Error metrics used are precision, recall, and F1 score

B. parameters of patchwork++

  • Set initial e τ,m and f τ,m to 0 for all m (1 ≤ m ≤ 4)
  • Parameters identical to previous work [1]
  • For RNR, set N noise = 20 and I noise = 0.2
  • For R-VPF, set d v = 0.1, θ v = 0.707, and K v = 3

V. results and discussion

A. comparison with the state-of-the-art methods

  • Proposed algorithm has highest F1 score compared to other ground segmentation methods
  • Addresses noise filtering, unsuitable definition of f n, and partial under-segmentation issues
  • Higher precision and recall than Patchwork, lower standard deviation of recall

B. effect of r-vpf

  • R-VPF allows R-GPF to estimate correct ground planes.
  • R-GPF without R-VPF occasionally leads to lots of false negatives.
  • R-GPF with R-VPF successfully segments ground by extracting points from the fence as nonground points.

C. effect of a-gle

  • Approximately 95.8% of the green points represent true ground based on the SemanticKITTI dataset.
  • 85.3% of the true ground points are included in the green points.
  • The black-dotted line in Fig. 10 is used to distinguish between ground and non-ground points.

Ground points

  • Non-ground points represent other points
  • Self-updated f τ,m is valid for distinguishing ground planes from non-ground planes

D. effect of tgr

  • TGR resolves partial under-segmentation issue
  • TGR increases recall with a small decrease in precision

E. different distributions of self-updated parameters depending on the surroundings

  • Self-updated parameters have different aspects depending on the surroundings
  • In highway scenarios, parameters are set to small values
  • In country scenarios, parameters are set to higher values
  • Algorithm is faster than Patchwork

Method

  • Speed Method Speed LineFit had a speed of 58.96
  • GPF had a speed of 29.72
  • RANSAC had a speed of 15.43
  • R-GPF had a speed of 35.30
  • CascadedSeg had a speed of 13.07
  • Patchwork had a speed of 43.97

Vi. conclusion

  • Proposed method, Patchwork++, is fast and robust for ground segmentation
  • Patchwork++ reduces the number of parameters that need to be fine-tuned
  • Patchwork++ will be used for various applications in the future