Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Towards Robust 3D Object Detection In Rainy Conditions

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition · Submitted 2 Oct 2023

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim Tests on real-world data show that our approach improves the robustness to road spray of several popular 3D object detectors.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID2310.00944 (version 2)
Pith ID4A3OWL3D, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationAldi Piroli, Daniel Meissner, Johannes Kopp, Klaus Dietmayer, Marc Walessa, Vinzenz Dallabetta. "Towards Robust 3D Object Detection In Rainy Conditions." arXiv:2310.00944 (2023). https://pith.science/paper/4A3OWL3D
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 6,100 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.10 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.20 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.04 · compares with prior results 0.42 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

LiDAR sensors are used in autonomous driving applications to accurately perceive the environment. However, they are affected by adverse weather conditions such as snow, fog, and rain. These everyday phenomena introduce unwanted noise into the measurements, severely degrading the performance of LiDAR-based perception systems. In this work, we propose a framework for improving the robustness of LiDAR-based 3D object detectors against road spray. Our approach uses a state-of-the-art adverse weather detection network to filter out spray from the LiDAR point cloud, which is then used as input for the object detector. In this way, the detected objects are less affected by the adverse weather in the scene, resulting in a more accurate perception of the environment. In addition to adverse weather filtering, we explore the use of radar targets to further filter false positive detections. Tests on real-world data show that our approach improves the robustness to road spray of several popular 3D object detectors.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 LiDAR sensors are used in autonomous driving applications to accurately perceive the environment. background 1.00 0.04 0.01 asserted 1.00
s1 However, they are affected by adverse weather conditions such as snow, fog, and rain. background 1.00 0.05 0.02 asserted 1.00
s2 These everyday phenomena introduce unwanted noise into the measurements, severely degrading the performance of LiDAR-based perception systems. background 1.00 0.06 0.02 asserted 1.00
s3 In this work, we propose a framework for improving the robustness of LiDAR-based 3D object detectors against road spray. contribution 1.00 0.85 0.11 asserted 0.93
s4 Our approach uses a state-of-the-art adverse weather detection network to filter out spray from the LiDAR point cloud, which is then used as input for the object detector. method 0.98 0.83 0.06 asserted 1.00
s5 In this way, the detected objects are less affected by the adverse weather in the scene, resulting in a more accurate perception of the environment. interpretation 0.79 0.40 0.32 asserted 0.98
s6 In addition to adverse weather filtering, we explore the use of radar targets to further filter false positive detections. method 0.67 0.84 0.04 asserted 0.57
s7 Tests on real-world data show that our approach improves the robustness to road spray of several popular 3D object detectors. result 1.00 0.96 0.74 asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: method or tool 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 0.90.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v2
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

LiDAR sensors are used in autonomous driving applications to accurately perceive the environment. However, they are affected by adverse weather conditions such as snow, fog, and rain. These everyday phenomena introduce unwanted noise into the measurements, severely degrading the performance of LiDAR-based perception systems. In this work, we propose a framework for improving the robustness of LiDAR-based 3D object detectors against road spray. Our approach uses a state-of-the-art adverse weather detection network to filter out spray from the LiDAR point cloud, which is then used as input for the object detector. In this way, the detected objects are less affected by the adverse weather in the scene, resulting in a more accurate perception of the environment. In addition to adverse weather filtering, we explore the use of radar targets to further filter false positive detections. Tests on real-world data show that our approach improves the robustness to road spray of several popular 3D object detectors.

Human review
How the literature uses it

What this paper does with the arXiv papers it cites

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

What it cites · 5 sentences without a confident label

Uses the method or tool of 2 papers

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.