Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 42 references

Spatiotemporal Decoupling for Efficient Vision-Based Occupancy Forecasting

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that 3D occupancy forecasting around a vehicle can be made more accurate and faster by predicting a 2D bird's-eye view, per-column heights, and instance flow instead of a dense 3D volume.

desk verdict A genuinely new decoupled formulation for 3D occupancy forecasting with credible SOTA numbers, but the instance-refinement mechanism is underspecified enough that the paper cannot be reproduced as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.14169 v1 pith:ABACKAF2 submitted 2024-11-21 cs.CV

Jingyi Xu , Xieyuanli Chen , Junyi Ma , Jiawei Huang , Jintao Xu , Yue Wang , Ling Pei This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords occupancyforecastingbird's-eyeviewheightestimationinstanceflowautonomousdriving3DpredictionconditionalIoUvision-basedperception
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish that 3D occupancy forecasting around an autonomous vehicle does not need to be treated as a dense 3D prediction problem. The authors argue that most voxels are empty and most occupied voxels are static, so a network that predicts a 2D bird's-eye-view occupancy map plus a height per column, then refines future frames by associating instances through predicted flow, can beat end-to-end 3D forecasting on both accuracy and speed. They report that this pipeline, EfficientOCF, reaches state-of-the-art results on the nuScenes, nuScenes-Occupancy, and Lyft-Level5 benchmarks with 82.33 ms inference time on a single GPU. They also introduce a conditional-IoU metric meant to avoid punishing predictions that the sparse LiDAR-derived labels simply failed to record.

What carries the argument

The objects carrying the argument are three 2D predictions: BEV occupancy, height per occupied grid cell, and backward centripetal flow, plus a refinement step that multiplies the initial occupancy by a binarized instance mask propagated by the flow. An adaptive dual pooling module, which learns a weighted combination of average and max pooling along the z-axis, compresses 3D voxel features into 2D BEV features so that both holistic column information and the prominent high-occupancy voxel that height prediction needs are retained. The conditional IoU metric (C-IoU) reclassifies false positives that fall inside annotated bounding boxes of movable objects as ground-truth omissions, so they no longer count against the model when the labels are incomplete.

What would settle it

Re-annotate a random subset of nuScenes-Occupancy test scenes with dense, human-verified occupancy, then recompute both IoU and C-IoU for EfficientOCF and OCFNet against those clean labels; if the forgiven false positives inside bounding boxes are mostly real prediction errors, the C-IoU gap between methods should largely disappear.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the conventional dense 3D occupancy forecasting format wastes capacity on two biases: empty space dominates the volume, and static voxels dominate change. Spatial decoupling replaces the dense 3D tensor with a 2D BEV occupancy map and a per-column height map, so 3D forecasts are assembled by lifting 2D predictions. Temporal decoupling separates current instance segmentation from future occupancy estimation: a backward centripetal flow head associates instance masks across timesteps, and those masks are used to refine the initial 2D occupancy before lifting. The paper argues that this makes learning easier because instance shapes from the present are more reliable than end-to-end forecasted shapes, and that the cost is repaid in sharper contours and fewer false positives.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that false positives lying inside annotated bounding boxes of movable objects are annotation omissions rather than genuine prediction errors, so forgiving them in C-IoU is fair; if real prediction errors are being forgiven, the reported accuracy gains shrink.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • EfficientOCF's reported 82.33 ms per sample (12.15 Hz) and 478 MB lower memory than OCFNet imply that vision-only 3D occupancy forecasting can run in real time on a single GPU.
  • The ablation that removes instance-aware refinement drops 3D quality by 1.64 IoU and 2.55 C-IoU points on nuScenes-Occupancy, so the flow-based temporal association, not just the 2D representation, is responsible for part of the gain.
  • Trained on one sixth of the data, EfficientOCF minus still beats fully trained OCFNet on 3D fine-grained metrics, suggesting the decoupled representation learns motion patterns with less supervision.
  • The height head converts 2D forecasts into 3D space and adds structure-aware supervision; without it, 3D evaluation is impossible, and adding the flow head gives a further accuracy jump on all metrics.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the C-IoU convention becomes standard, datasets with sparse labels will report higher scores, so comparability across papers will depend on disclosing exactly how the forgiven false positives inside bounding boxes are computed.
  • The same spatial decoupling of 2D occupancy plus per-column height could be transferred to other camera-based 3D perception tasks, such as semantic scene completion, whenever height alone captures the structure above each ground cell.
  • Because the refinement stage relies on instance segmentation at the present frame and flow association, its accuracy may be bounded by perception errors at t = -1; feeding a LiDAR-based instance head into the same pipeline is a testable way to measure how much downstream forecast accuracy would rise.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes EfficientOCF, a camera-based 3D occupancy forecasting method built on two decoupling ideas. Spatially, it replaces dense 3D occupancy with 2D BEV occupancy plus per-column height, predicting both in 2D and lifting to 3D. Temporally, it refines initial 2D occupancy forecasts by propagating instance masks from the present frame into the future using predicted backward centripetal flow. The network uses Lift-Splat-Shoot for perception, an adaptive dual pooling strategy for 3D-to-2D transformation, and three 2D heads (segmentation, height, flow). Experiments on nuScenes, nuScenes-Occupancy, and Lyft-Level5 report higher IoU, C-IoU, and VPQ than PowerBEV, OpenOccupancy, OccFormer, and OCFNet, with an inference time of 82.33 ms. The paper also introduces the conditional IoU (C-IoU) metric, which forgives false positives inside annotated bounding boxes.

Significance. If the results hold, the 2D-plus-height representation is a valuable efficiency-accuracy design, and the instance-flow refinement offers a way to inject instance consistency into occupancy forecasting. The ablation studies in Tables III-V and the supplementary material support the contribution of each head and of temporal refinement. The strict IoU improvements are substantial and independent of the proposed C-IoU metric: for example, Table I shows 3D IoU_f of 19.02 for EfficientOCF versus 12.57 for OCFNet. The main limitations are the underspecified refinement module, the unvalidated labeling-noise assumption underlying C-IoU, the use of ground-truth average heights for the PowerBEV baseline, and the absence of error bars or released code.

major comments (3)
  1. [III-B, Eq. (1)] The temporal-decoupling refinement is not described completely enough to reproduce, and as written the training objective is problematic. The three heads are segmentation, height, and flow; there is no instance-center head. Yet the text says 'we extract the centers of instances by non-maximum suppression (NMS) at t = -1 and associate pixel-wise instance ID between adjacent frames ... using the predicted 2D backward centripetal flow.' It is never stated what input NMS is applied to, how instances are segmented at t = -1, or how the hard mask CLIP(M^{2D}_t) is generated. Moreover, Eq. (1) writes the occupancy loss on the refined output \bar{O}^{2D}_t = O^{2D}_t \cdot \bar{M}^{2D}_t, while NMS and ID assignment are non-differentiable; the paper does not explain how gradients reach the segmentation and flow heads through this mask, or whether the refinement is used only at inference. Since Table III attributes 1.64 points of 3D ~IoU_f and 2.55 points of ~C-IoU_f to this module, and Table VI reports VPQ gains from it, the mechanism needs a precise specification (or a statement that Eq. (1) is an approximation with a surrogate gradient).
  2. [III-C, Eq. (3)] The C-IoU metric assumes that false positives inside annotated bounding boxes (gFP) are annotation omissions rather than prediction errors. The paper provides examples of incomplete fine-grained labels (Fig. V, Fig. VI) but no quantitative or independent validation that in-box false positives are predominantly label omissions. Since C-IoU is introduced by the same authors and used in Tables I, II, and III to support the SOTA claims, this assumption should be tested, for example, by comparing against manually corrected labels or by reporting the fraction of gFP voxels that coincide with observed LiDAR points. Without such validation, the large C-IoU gains are not a clean measure of forecasting accuracy, although the standard IoU columns already support the main ranking.
  3. [IV-A, Table I] The PowerBEV baseline is lifted to 3D by assigning a fixed height for each test scene computed from the average ground-truth height of all general movable objects. This uses oracle information that would not be available at inference, and it makes the 3D comparison against PowerBEV non-standard. The authors should either use a fixed canonical height or a predicted height module for PowerBEV, and report both protocols; at minimum, the protocol should be justified because it affects the 3D columns of Tables I and II.
minor comments (6)
  1. [III-C, Eq. (3)] The denominator in Eq. (3) has an unbalanced parenthesis: |TP_t| + |FN_t| + (|FP_t| - |gFP_t|)) should be |TP_t| + |FN_t| + (|FP_t| - |gFP_t|).
  2. [II, Related Work] In the second paragraph of Section II, 'relies sorely on a semantic segmentation head' should read 'relies solely on a semantic segmentation head.'
  3. [III-C, Evaluation metrics] In the evaluation metrics paragraph, 'to access 2D OCF performance' should read 'to assess 2D OCF performance.'
  4. [III-B, Eq. (1)] The symbol \bar{O}^{2D}_t is used in Eq. (1) before the refinement module is defined; the definition should be introduced before the loss equation.
  5. [IV, Tables I-VII] No error bars, standard deviations, or multiple-seed results are reported, so the size of the improvements (for example, 0.49 points in 2D IoU_c in Table 1 of the supplementary) should be interpreted cautiously.
  6. [Supplementary, Sec. 1-A] The phrase 'the performance gains diminishment' should be 'the performance gains diminish' (or 'the performance gains show diminution').

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the accuracy claims rest on standard IoU and external baselines; the self-authored C-IoU metric raises a validity concern but is not a circular reduction of the prediction chain.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is empirically self-contained rather than circular. EfficientOCF is an architecture trained with the loss in Eq. (1), which supervises the segmentation, height, and flow heads independently, and its accuracy is evaluated with standard IoU (Eq. 2), VPQ (Eq. 4), and published baselines (PowerBEV, OpenOccupancy, OccFormer, OCFNet). The ablation in Table III measures the temporal-decoupling contribution by comparing EfficientOCF with and without instance-aware refinement on the same metrics and data, so the reported gain is internally measured rather than assumed from a fit. The C-IoU metric in Eq. (3) is authored by the same group and forgives false positives inside annotated bounding boxes, which is lenient toward box-shaped predictions consistent with the box-derived supervision used to generate occupancy labels; this is a metric-validity concern, not a circular reduction, because the model is not trained to optimize C-IoU and the standard-IoU results (e.g., 3D IoU_f 19.02 vs. OCFNet 12.57 in Table I) stand independently of the proposed metric. Citations to [12] and [13] include overlapping authors, but they are used for standard components and benchmark protocol (ResNet backbone, Lift-Splat-Shoot lifting, Cam4DOcc evaluation splits and movable-object definition) rather than to forbid alternatives or to import an unverified uniqueness claim. The refinement module is underspecified: the paper does not state how instance centers at t=-1 are obtained from the three heads, nor how Eq. (1) backpropagates through the hard mask CLIP(M^{2D}_t). This is a reproducibility gap, not a circularity step. No prediction in the paper reduces by construction to a fitted parameter or to a self-citation chain, so the appropriate circularity score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method is empirical and system-level. The main extra commitments are a domain assumption about representing 3D objects with a single height per column, an assumption about labeling noise baked into the new C-IoU metric, and reliance on flow-based instance association from prior work. The loss weights and NMS threshold are unstated hyperparameters that affect the reported accuracy.

free parameters (3)
  • lambda_1, lambda_2, lambda_3 = not reported
    Weighted sum in Eq. (1) balances occupancy, height, and flow losses; values are not given and directly affect the reported accuracy.
  • Instance NMS threshold for center extraction = not reported
    The refinement module extracts instance centers via NMS (Section III-B); threshold is unstated and controls instance mask quality used to refine occupancy forecasts.
  • alpha_avg and alpha_max = learned, initial values not reported
    Learnable weights in the adaptive dual pooling strategy; their values determine how height information is preserved in the 2D BEV features.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption One height value per BEV column is sufficient to represent 3D occupancy of general movable objects.
    Spatial decoupling stores only the top occupied height per 2D grid and lifts 2D OCF to 3D (Section III-A, Fig. IV); this fails for vertically overlapping or non-convex objects.
  • ad hoc to paper False positives inside GT bounding boxes are annotation omissions, not prediction errors.
    The C-IoU metric in Eq. (3) excludes in-box false positives from the penalty; no independent validation is provided.
  • domain assumption Backward centripetal flow from PowerBEV reliably associates instances across future frames.
    Temporal decoupling propagates t=0 instance masks through predicted flow to all future frames (Section III-B); flow errors directly corrupt refinement.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Spatiotemporal Decoupling for Efficient Vision-Based Occupancy Forecasting." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ABACKAF2

@misc{pith2026241114169,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Spatiotemporal Decoupling for Efficient Vision-Based Occupancy Forecasting},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ABACKAF2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.14169}
}
read the original abstract

The task of occupancy forecasting (OCF) involves utilizing past and present perception data to predict future occupancy states of autonomous vehicle surrounding environments, which is critical for downstream tasks such as obstacle avoidance and path planning. Existing 3D OCF approaches struggle to predict plausible spatial details for movable objects and suffer from slow inference speeds due to neglecting the bias and uneven distribution of changing occupancy states in both space and time. In this paper, we propose a novel spatiotemporal decoupling vision-based paradigm to explicitly tackle the bias and achieve both effective and efficient 3D OCF. To tackle spatial bias in empty areas, we introduce a novel spatial representation that decouples the conventional dense 3D format into 2D bird's-eye view (BEV) occupancy with corresponding height values, enabling 3D OCF derived only from 2D predictions thus enhancing efficiency. To reduce temporal bias on static voxels, we design temporal decoupling to improve end-to-end OCF by temporally associating instances via predicted flows. We develop an efficient multi-head network EfficientOCF to achieve 3D OCF with our devised spatiotemporally decoupled representation. A new metric, conditional IoU (C-IoU), is also introduced to provide a robust 3D OCF performance assessment, especially in datasets with missing or incomplete annotations. The experimental results demonstrate that EfficientOCF surpasses existing baseline methods on accuracy and efficiency, achieving state-of-the-art performance with a fast inference time of 82.33ms with a single GPU. Our code will be released as open source.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.14169 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Visualization of TP (green), FP (red), and FN (yellow) results against ground truth at continuous timesteps before and after [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Visualization of OCF results of EfficientOCF, OCFNet, and ground truth from the nuScenes-Occupancy dataset [2]. The occupancy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Monoscene: Monocular 3d semantic scene completion,

    A.-Q. Cao and R. De Charette, “Monoscene: Monocular 3d semantic scene completion,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 3991–4001, 2022

    2022

  2. [2]

    Openoccupancy: A large scale benchmark for surrounding semantic occupancy perception,

    X. Wang, Z. Zhu, W. Xu, Y . Zhang, Y . Wei, X. Chi, Y . Ye, D. Du, J. Lu, and X. Wang, “Openoccupancy: A large scale benchmark for surrounding semantic occupancy perception,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pp. 17850– 17859, 2023

    2023

  3. [3]

    V oxformer: Sparse voxel transformer for camera- based 3d semantic scene completion,

    Y . Li, Z. Yu, C. Choy, C. Xiao, J. M. Alvarez, S. Fidler, C. Feng, and A. Anandkumar, “V oxformer: Sparse voxel transformer for camera- based 3d semantic scene completion,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pp. 9087– 9098, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Occformer: Dual-path transformer for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction,

    Y . Zhang, Z. Zhu, and D. Du, “Occformer: Dual-path transformer for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pp. 9433– 9443, 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Tri-perspective view for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction,

    Y . Huang, W. Zheng, Y . Zhang, J. Zhou, and J. Lu, “Tri-perspective view for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction,” in Proceed- ings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp. 9223–9232, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    UniVision: A Unified Framework for Vision-Centric 3D Perception

    Y . Hong, Q. Liu, H. Cheng, D. Ma, H. Dai, Y . Wang, G. Cao, and Y . Ding, “Univision: A unified framework for vision-centric 3d perception,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.06994 , 2024. TABLE VII: Comparison of inference time Approach Inference time [ms] Perception Processing Prediction Total OCFNet 107.05 4.18 13.15 124.38 EfficientOCF (ours) 64.78 5.05 12.50 82.33

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Selfocc: Self- supervised vision-based 3d occupancy prediction,

    Y . Huang, W. Zheng, B. Zhang, J. Zhou, and J. Lu, “Selfocc: Self- supervised vision-based 3d occupancy prediction,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion, pp. 19946–19956, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Point cloud forecasting as a proxy for 4d occupancy forecasting,

    T. Khurana, P. Hu, D. Held, and D. Ramanan, “Point cloud forecasting as a proxy for 4d occupancy forecasting,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 1116–1124, 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Fiery: Future instance prediction in bird’s- eye view from surround monocular cameras,

    A. Hu, Z. Murez, N. Mohan, S. Dudas, J. Hawke, V . Badrinarayanan, R. Cipolla, and A. Kendall, “Fiery: Future instance prediction in bird’s- eye view from surround monocular cameras,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pp. 15273– 15282, 2021

    2021

  2. [10]

    Stretchbev: Stretching future instance prediction spatially and temporally,

    A. K. Akan and F. G ¨uney, “Stretchbev: Stretching future instance prediction spatially and temporally,” in European Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 444–460, Springer, 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Beverse: Unified perception and prediction in birds-eye-view for vision-centric autonomous driving,

    Y . Zhang, Z. Zhu, W. Zheng, J. Huang, G. Huang, J. Zhou, and J. Lu, “Beverse: Unified perception and prediction in birds-eye-view for vision-centric autonomous driving,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.09743, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Powerbev: a powerful yet lightweight framework for instance pre- diction in bird’s-eye view,

    P. Li, S. Ding, X. Chen, N. Hanselmann, M. Cordts, and J. Gall, “Powerbev: a powerful yet lightweight framework for instance pre- diction in bird’s-eye view,” in Proceedings of the Thirty-Second International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pp. 1080– 1088, 2023

    2023

  5. [13]

    Cam4docc: Benchmark for camera-only 4d occupancy forecasting in autonomous driving applications,

    J. Ma, X. Chen, J. Huang, J. Xu, Z. Luo, J. Xu, W. Gu, R. Ai, and H. Wang, “Cam4docc: Benchmark for camera-only 4d occupancy forecasting in autonomous driving applications,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 21486–21495, 2024

    2024

  6. [14]

    Lidar- based 4d occupancy completion and forecasting,

    X. Liu, M. Gong, Q. Fang, H. Xie, Y . Li, H. Zhao, and C. Feng, “Lidar- based 4d occupancy completion and forecasting,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.11239, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Surroundocc: Multi-camera 3d occupancy prediction for autonomous driving,

    Y . Wei, L. Zhao, W. Zheng, Z. Zhu, J. Zhou, and J. Lu, “Surroundocc: Multi-camera 3d occupancy prediction for autonomous driving,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pp. 21729–21740, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    Uniocc: Unifying vision-centric 3d occupancy prediction with geometric and semantic rendering,

    M. Pan, L. Liu, J. Liu, P. Huang, L. Wang, S. Zhang, S. Xu, Z. Lai, and K. Yang, “Uniocc: Unifying vision-centric 3d occupancy prediction with geometric and semantic rendering,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.09117, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Occtransformer: Improving bevformer for 3d camera-only occupancy prediction,

    J. Liu, S. Zhang, C. Kong, W. Zhang, Y . Wu, Y . Ding, B. Xu, R. Ming, D. Wei, and X. Liu, “Occtransformer: Improving bevformer for 3d camera-only occupancy prediction,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.18140, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving,

    H. Caesar, V . Bankiti, A. H. Lang, S. V ora, V . E. Liong, Q. Xu, A. Krishnan, Y . Pan, G. Baldan, and O. Beijbom, “nuscenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pp. 11621–11631, 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    Lyft level 5 perception dataset 2020,

    R. Kesten, M. Usman, J. Houston, T. Pandya, K. Nadhamuni, A. Fer- reira, M. Yuan, B. Low, A. Jain, P. Ondruska, S. Omari, S. Shah, A. Kulkarni, A. Kazakova, C. Tao, L. Platinsky, W. Jiang, and V . Shet, “Lyft level 5 perception dataset 2020,” 2019

    2020

  12. [20]

    Attention is all you need,

    A. Vaswani, “Attention is all you need,” Advances in Neural Informa- tion Processing Systems , 2017

    2017

  13. [21]

    Occ3d: A large-scale 3d occupancy prediction benchmark for autonomous driving,

    X. Tian, T. Jiang, L. Yun, Y . Mao, H. Yang, Y . Wang, Y . Wang, and H. Zhao, “Occ3d: A large-scale 3d occupancy prediction benchmark for autonomous driving,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 36, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Bevformer: Learning bird’s-eye-view representation from multi-camera images via spatiotemporal transformers,

    Z. Li, W. Wang, H. Li, E. Xie, C. Sima, T. Lu, Y . Qiao, and J. Dai, “Bevformer: Learning bird’s-eye-view representation from multi-camera images via spatiotemporal transformers,” in European conference on computer vision , pp. 1–18, Springer, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    Bevdepth: Acquisition of reliable depth for multi-view 3d object detection,

    Y . Li, Z. Ge, G. Yu, J. Yang, Z. Wang, Y . Shi, J. Sun, and Z. Li, “Bevdepth: Acquisition of reliable depth for multi-view 3d object detection,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 37, pp. 1477–1485, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Bevfusion: Multi-task multi-sensor fusion with unified bird’s- eye view representation,

    Z. Liu, H. Tang, A. Amini, X. Yang, H. Mao, D. L. Rus, and S. Han, “Bevfusion: Multi-task multi-sensor fusion with unified bird’s- eye view representation,” in 2023 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) , pp. 2774–2781, IEEE, 2023

    2023

  17. [25]

    Multi-modal hierarchical transformer for occupancy flow field prediction in autonomous driving,

    H. Liu, Z. Huang, and C. Lv, “Multi-modal hierarchical transformer for occupancy flow field prediction in autonomous driving,” in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pp. 1449–1455, IEEE, 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    Occupancy flow fields for motion forecasting in autonomous driving,

    R. Mahjourian, J. Kim, Y . Chai, M. Tan, B. Sapp, and D. Anguelov, “Occupancy flow fields for motion forecasting in autonomous driving,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 5639–5646, 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    Motionnet: Joint perception and motion prediction for autonomous driving based on bird’s eye view maps,

    P. Wu, S. Chen, and D. N. Metaxas, “Motionnet: Joint perception and motion prediction for autonomous driving based on bird’s eye view maps,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pp. 11385–11395, 2020

    2020

  20. [28]

    Mp3: A unified model to map, perceive, predict and plan,

    S. Casas, A. Sadat, and R. Urtasun, “Mp3: A unified model to map, perceive, predict and plan,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 14403– 14412, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Monet: Motion-based point cloud prediction network,

    F. Lu, G. Chen, Z. Li, L. Zhang, Y . Liu, S. Qu, and A. Knoll, “Monet: Motion-based point cloud prediction network,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 13794–13804, 2021

    2021

  22. [30]

    Pcpnet: An efficient and semantic-enhanced transformer network for point cloud prediction,

    Z. Luo, J. Ma, Z. Zhou, and G. Xiong, “Pcpnet: An efficient and semantic-enhanced transformer network for point cloud prediction,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 4267–4274, 2023

    2023

  23. [31]

    Atppnet: Atten- tion based temporal point cloud prediction network,

    K. Pal, A. Sharma, A. Sharma, and K. M. Krishna, “Atppnet: Atten- tion based temporal point cloud prediction network,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.17399, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Self-supervised point cloud prediction using 3d spatio-temporal convolutional net- works,

    B. Mersch, X. Chen, J. Behley, and C. Stachniss, “Self-supervised point cloud prediction using 3d spatio-temporal convolutional net- works,” in Conference on Robot Learning , pp. 1444–1454, PMLR, 2022

    2022

  25. [33]

    Pointrnn: Point recurrent neural network for moving point cloud processing,

    H. Fan and Y . Yang, “Pointrnn: Point recurrent neural network for moving point cloud processing,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.08287 , 2019

    1910 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Occworld: Learning a 3d occupancy world model for autonomous driving,

    W. Zheng, W. Chen, Y . Huang, B. Zhang, Y . Duan, and J. Lu, “Occworld: Learning a 3d occupancy world model for autonomous driving,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.16038 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Occsora: 4d occupancy generation models as world simulators for autonomous driving,

    L. Wang, W. Zheng, Y . Ren, H. Jiang, Z. Cui, H. Yu, and J. Lu, “Occsora: 4d occupancy generation models as world simulators for autonomous driving,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20337 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Lift, splat, shoot: Encoding images from arbitrary camera rigs by implicitly unprojecting to 3d,

    J. Philion and S. Fidler, “Lift, splat, shoot: Encoding images from arbitrary camera rigs by implicitly unprojecting to 3d,” in Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XIV 16 , pp. 194–210, Springer, 2020

    2020

  29. [37]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition,

    K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pp. 770–778, 2016

    2016

  30. [38]

    Video panoptic seg- mentation,

    D. Kim, S. Woo, J.-Y . Lee, and I. S. Kweon, “Video panoptic seg- mentation,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition , pp. 9859–9868, 2020

    2020

  31. [39]

    Self-training with noisy student improves imagenet classification,

    Q. Xie, M.-T. Luong, E. Hovy, and Q. V . Le, “Self-training with noisy student improves imagenet classification,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pp. 10687–10698, 2020

    2020

  32. [40]

    Adam: A method for stochastic optimiza- tion,

    D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimiza- tion,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 , 2014. Supplementary Material

    2014 arXiv

  33. [41]

    IV of the main text

    A DDITIONAL ABLATION RESULTS In this section, we present additional ablation results for occupancy forecasting (OCF) mentioned in Sec. IV of the main text. In Sec. 1-A, we ablate temporal decoupling for EfficientOCF. In Sec. 1-B, we then present the improvement of our proposed...

  34. [42]

    As shown in Fig

    V ISUALIZATION OF OCF R ESULTS In this section, we present additional visualizations of fine-grained OCF results on the nuScenes-Occupancy dataset, comparing our proposed EfficientOCF with the SOTA baseline, OCFNet [13]. As shown in Fig. 2, EfficientOCF consistently forecasts ...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.