Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 7 minor 1 cited by

EADReg: Probabilistic Correspondence Generation with Efficient Autoregressive Diffusion Model for Outdoor Point Cloud Registration

T0 review · 4 major / 7 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 EADReg claims a diffusion-based correspondence generator can register outdoor LiDAR scans at centimeter accuracy while running as fast as convolutional methods.

desk verdict The autoregressive diffusion loop is the paper's centerpiece, but its training objective does not match the inference procedure, leaving the main novelty unverified. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15271 v1 pith:ABSDZGBL submitted 2024-11-22 cs.CV cs.AI

Linrui Gong , Jiuming Liu , Junyi Ma , Lihao Liu , Yaonan Wang , Hesheng Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CVcs.AI
keywords pointcloudregistrationLiDARdiffusionmodelsautoregressiveGaussianmixturemodeloutlierrejectioncoarse-to-fineoutdoorscenes
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

EADReg claims that diffusion models, usually seen as too slow and memory-hungry for large outdoor scans, can be made the basis of a fast and accurate LiDAR registration pipeline. The method combines a training-free outlier-rejection step, bidirectional Gaussian mixture models, with a diffusion process that generates correspondences only among the top-K nearest neighbors of each source point rather than across the whole target cloud. Inference is treated autoregressively: each denoising step produces a small transformation that warps the source points for the next step, and the final pose is the product of the accumulated transformations. On KITTI, NuScenes, and Apollo, the paper reports centimeter-level translation errors (0.040 m on KITTI, 0.090 m on NuScenes) with runtime around 129 ms and 112 ms, comparable to fast convolutional baselines. If true, this shows that generative correspondence estimation need not be sacrificed for speed in outdoor robotics.

What carries the argument

Three mechanisms carry the argument. First, the Bi-directional Gaussian Mixture Model (BGMM) outlier-removal module fits a GMM to each scan and removes points attached to Gaussian components whose top-K counterpart in the other scan is not reciprocal, purifying the clouds at no extra training cost. Second, the restricted diffusion correspondence generator predicts, for each source point, a distribution over its K nearest target neighbors ($\hat{C} \in \mathbb{R}^{N_S \times K}$) conditioned on geometric features, descriptor features, noise level, and time step, instead of a global $N_S \times N_T$ correspondence matrix. Third, the autoregressive inference loop converts each denoising step into a rigid transform that warps the source points for the next step, with the final pose formed by the product of transforms. Together, the coarse purification makes the top-K locality assumption valid, and the locality assumption is what collapses the cost of diffusion-based correspondence generation.

What would settle it

Take the trained EADReg on KITTI and, after the coarse stage, add a known translation offset of 5-10 m to the warped source clouds before the fine stage. If the method's recall or RTE degrades sharply, the top-K locality assumption is the load-bearing premise; if it stays flat, the diffusion stage is recovering correspondences beyond the coarse neighborhood. A second check: sweep K from 3 to 32 on a held-out set and see whether RTE drops materially, which would contradict the paper's ablation conclusion that K barely matters.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's claim is that point-to-point correspondence generation for outdoor LiDAR can be reformulated as a sequence of small, local denoising problems instead of one dense global matching problem. The coarse stage fits a Gaussian mixture model to each scan, removes components whose mutual nearest neighbor in the other scan is not among their top-K, and uses the purified points to estimate an initial transform by weighted SVD. The fine stage then trains a lightweight conditional diffusion model to denoise a correspondence matrix $\hat{C} \in \mathbb{R}^{N_S \times K}$ that assigns each source point a distribution over its K nearest target candidates. During inference, each denoising step yields a transform that warps the source cloud for the next step, so the sequence of transforms accumulates into the final registration. The paper argues this design is what lets a diffusion-based method reach 0.040 m RTE and 0.117 degrees RRE on KITTI with 129.4 ms runtime, beat prior diffusion PCR methods on outdoor data, and produce the only centimeter-level RTE on NuScenes among the compared methods.

Load-bearing premise

The method assumes that after the coarse stage, the true match for every source point is among its K nearest neighbors in the target scan; if the coarse transform drifts or occlusion removes the correct candidate, the diffusion stage has no way to recover it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Diffusion-based correspondence generation can be deployed in real-time outdoor pipelines; the paper reports 129.4 ms per pair on KITTI and 112.4 ms on NuScenes.
  • The BGMM outlier-removal step improves coarse registration without introducing trainable parameters; removing it raises RTE from 0.040 m to 0.042 m in the paper's ablation.
  • Because GPU memory grows steeply with K (from 19,083 MB at K=1 to 23,571 MB at K=7 on KITTI), global dense correspondence prediction is impractical for large scans, so the top-K formulation is necessary for training feasibility.
  • The diffusion step count can be kept small: performance saturates around three sampling steps, so DDIM acceleration does not cost accuracy.
  • The coarse-to-fine autoregressive design makes the diffusion model behave as a refinement module, so its robustness gains come without the inference cost usually attributed to generative registration methods.

Reading between the lines

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

  • An untested consequence is that the same coarse-purify-then-local-diffusion recipe could transfer to other sparse 3D sensors, such as solid-state LiDAR or radar, if their point density keeps the top-K assumption intact.
  • The autoregressive inference loop is stated only for rigid-body transforms; the history-buffer mechanism is a generic sequence-modeling scaffold that could in principle be applied to deformable or non-rigid matching, though the paper does not explore this.
  • The paper validates K through ablations on KITTI; a stronger test would be to recompute those ablations under larger frame intervals or added synthetic drift, where the number of nearest neighbors needed to enclose the true match would grow.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper proposes EADReg, a coarse-to-fine pipeline for outdoor LiDAR point cloud registration. In the coarse stage, a Bi-directional Gaussian Mixture Model (BGMM) module rejects outlier GMM components and their attached points, after which a lightweight network computes coarse correspondences and an SVD-based transformation. In the fine stage, a diffusion model denoises a top-K correspondence matrix, and an autoregressive-style inference loop warps the source cloud by the predicted transformation at each denoising step before recomputing the candidate set. The method is evaluated on KITTI, NuScenes, and Apollo-SouthBay, reporting state-of-the-art RTE/RRE and runtime comparable to convolutional baselines (e.g., 0.040 m RTE and 0.117 degrees RRE on KITTI at 129.4 ms), with ablations on the number of GMM clusters, diffusion steps, candidate size K, and rotation loss weight.

Significance. If the results hold, EADReg would be a meaningful advance: it demonstrates that a diffusion-based correspondence generator can be accurate and fast for large-scale outdoor LiDAR registration, and its top-K formulation avoids the prohibitive memory cost of dense N_S x N_T correspondence prediction. The BGMM outlier removal is training-free and introduces no extra learnable parameters, and the experiments cover three standard benchmarks with consistent baselines. However, the significance of the specific diffusion contribution is currently not established because the training objective in Eq. (20) does not simulate the autoregressive loop used at inference, and the inference-time softmax in Eq. (12) is not matched by the training loss. The manuscript also omits key implementation details (GMM fitting procedure, detector-descriptor backbone) needed to reproduce or even fully evaluate the method.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3.3 (Eq. 20) and Algorithm 1] The paper's core novelty, the autoregressive diffusion loop, is not trained as described. In Algorithm 1, lines 4-10, each denoising step computes a transformation from the denoised correspondence, warps the source points (line 8), recomputes the geometric features F^t_G with a new KNN candidate set, and then forms C_{t-1} via the DDIM update over the previous candidate set. The training loss in Eq. (20), however, is a single MSE between F_f[C_t, t, F^t_G, F_D] and C_gt, where C_gt is built once from GT-warped source points; the paper never states that training simulates the sequential warping, the coarse initialization, or the changing candidate sets used at inference. As written, the DDIM update mixes a cleaned correspondence over old candidates into a new noisy state whose features come from different candidates, which is not a valid reverse diffusion process. This mismatch must be resolved (e.g., by training with the inference loop, or by explicitly reformulating the method as iterative SVD refinement rather than autoregressive diffusion) before the probabilistic autoregressive claim in Eq. (16) can be accepted.
  2. [Sec. 3.3 (Eq. 12) vs. Eq. (20)] The inference procedure applies Softmax to the network output (Eq. 12) to obtain candidate weights that are then used in the weighted SVD of Eq. (13), but the training loss in Eq. (20) minimizes raw MSE between the network output and C_gt without any Softmax. These are not equivalent objectives for the downstream transformation estimate, so the training signal does not directly supervise the quantity used at inference. The authors should align the training and inference operations (for example, supervise the softmaxed weights with a cross-entropy or KL term, or remove Softmax from inference) and rerun the experiments.
  3. [Sec. 3.2 (Eqs. 1-2)] The BGMM module is under-specified. Eq. (1) defines a GMM, but the paper does not state how the J components are fit (EM initialization, number of iterations, covariance regularization), how Eq. (2) is computed in practice (the notation N_k(Theta_T_j) and N_1(Theta_S_i) is ambiguous), or how outlier GMM components are mapped back to individual points. Since BGMM is a central contribution and its removal is ablated in Table 3, these details are necessary for reproducibility and for assessing whether the coarse-stage gains come from the proposed filtering rule rather than from the GMM fitting configuration.
  4. [Sec. 3.3 (Eq. 10) and Table 6] The fine stage assumes that after coarse warping the true target of each source point lies among its K nearest target neighbors. This locality premise is load-bearing for both accuracy and efficiency, but it is validated only on the three benchmark datasets with interval-10 pairs. The paper should report results under larger initial drift, partial overlap, or reduced K to show the scope of the assumption and to characterize the failure mode of the diffusion refinement; as written, the robustness claim to 'perturbations in outdoor LiDAR point clouds' is broader than the evidence supports.
minor comments (7)
  1. [Algorithm 1 and Sec. 3.3] The title of Algorithm 1 and the phrase in Sec. 3.3 misspell 'autoregressive' as 'autogressive'; please correct.
  2. [Table 7] The table header uses 'K' for the number of sampling steps, which conflicts with the correspondence-candidate size K in Table 6 and Eq. (10); it should be labeled 'S'.
  3. [Sec. 4.3, Network Structure paragraph] The text says 'the average RRE of the coarse stage with 0.119cm is better than the learning based method DGR', but Table 3 reports Only Coarse as RTE 0.119 m and RRE 0.373 degrees; the metric names and units are inconsistent.
  4. [Eq. (18)] Eq. (18) does not define how tilde t_l relates to the coarse and fine stage transformations, and the index l in {c,f} is not made explicit in the definitions of tilde R_l and tilde t_l; please specify which transformations enter the loss.
  5. [References] The reference list appears twice in the submission; please remove the duplicate.
  6. [Sec. 4.1] The sentence 'the influence of different sampling steps will be discussed in the Sec.' lacks a section number; please provide the correct cross-reference.
  7. [Eq. (16)] The notation p(C^T, ..., C^t) = prod_t p(C^t | C^T, ..., C^{t-1}) is inconsistent with the reverse-time indexing in Algorithm 1 and with the conditioning on the features F^t_G; please align the notation with the actual inference procedure.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No material circularity: the diffusion and coarse-stage objectives are supervised by external ground-truth transformations, and the autoregressive loop is iterative feedback rather than a definitional tautology.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation chain is not circular by construction. The fine-stage diffusion loss (Eq. 20) minimizes the discrepancy between the network output and a ground-truth correspondence matrix Cgt that is built exclusively from the external GT transformation via optimal transport and KNN search; no model output is folded into the training target. The coarse stage likewise uses fixed point-cloud geometry, descriptors, and SVD, with supervision from the same external GT. The autoregressive inference loop (Eqs. 13-16, Algorithm 1) does feed the model's own predicted transformation back into the next step's source points, but this is standard iterative refinement rather than a definitional circle: the model is not defined in terms of its output, and the feedback is a sequential estimation procedure. Self-citations (e.g., RegFormer [32]) appear only as baselines and experimental settings (e.g., the frame interval 'set to 10 as in [32,39]'), not as load-bearing support for the method's correctness. Any train-test mismatch in the autoregressive loop (the training loss does not simulate the warping and candidate-set recomputation used at inference) is a legitimate correctness or generalization concern, but it does not make the derivation equivalent to its inputs. The performance claims are checked against external benchmarks (KITTI, NuScenes, Apollo) with standard splits and metrics, so the experimental evaluation is self-contained. Overall, the finding is a non-finding under the circularity criteria: no equation reduces to its own inputs and no load-bearing premise is imported solely from the authors' prior work.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard supervised learning for descriptors and diffusion plus two problem-specific assumptions: (1) after coarse warping, correct correspondences lie in the K nearest neighbors, and (2) GMM components cleanly separate outliers. These are reasonable for the reported benchmarks but are not proven for general outdoor scenes. The free parameters are all conventional hyperparameters chosen by ablation.

free parameters (6)
  • Number of GMM clusters J = 8
    Selected by ablation on KITTI (Table 4). Larger J slows inference with negligible accuracy change.
  • Number of nearest neighbors K = 3
    Selected by ablation (Table 6). Controls the fine-stage search region and GPU memory usage.
  • Diffusion sampling steps S = 3
    Selected by ablation (Table 7) as the balance point between accuracy and runtime.
  • Rotation loss weight alpha = 4
    Selected by ablation (Table 5) to balance RTE and RRE; higher alpha reduces RRE but can hurt RTE.
  • Voxel size = 0.3 m
    Preprocessing hyperparameter for initial downsampling; stated in implementation details.
  • Sampled point count = 16384 (KITTI/Apollo), 8192 (NuScenes)
    Chosen based on dataset scale; affects the feasible correspondence dimension.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math DDPM/DDIM denoising equations from Ho et al. (2020) and Song et al. (2020) correctly model the reverse process
    Invoked in Sec. 3.3 and Algorithm 1 for sampling the correspondence matrix.
  • domain assumption Source and target LiDAR frames are related by a single 6-DOF rigid transformation
    Stated in Sec. 1 as the formal PCR problem; all losses and SVD assume this.
  • domain assumption After coarse warping, the true target correspondence of each source point lies within the K nearest neighbors
    Central to the fine-stage design (Sec. 3.3, Eq. 10); validated only empirically via the K ablation.
  • domain assumption GMM clustering of point clouds produces components that separate outliers from inliers well enough for the BGMM rejection rule
    Used in the coarse stage (Sec. 3.2); the fitting procedure is not detailed.
  • standard math Optimal transport refinement of the GT distance matrix yields valid point-correspondence supervision
    Used in Sec. 3.4 to construct C_gt; follows from standard OT theory (Villani 2009).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of EADReg: Probabilistic Correspondence Generation with Efficient Autoregressive Diffusion Model for Outdoor Point Cloud Registration." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ABSDZGBL

@misc{pith2026241115271,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: EADReg: Probabilistic Correspondence Generation with Efficient Autoregressive Diffusion Model for Outdoor Point Cloud Registration},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ABSDZGBL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15271}
}
read the original abstract

Diffusion models have shown the great potential in the point cloud registration (PCR) task, especially for enhancing the robustness to challenging cases. However, existing diffusion-based PCR methods primarily focus on instance-level scenarios and struggle with outdoor LiDAR points, where the sparsity, irregularity, and huge point scale inherent in LiDAR points pose challenges to establishing dense global point-to-point correspondences. To address this issue, we propose a novel framework named EADReg for efficient and robust registration of LiDAR point clouds based on autoregressive diffusion models. EADReg follows a coarse-to-fine registration paradigm. In the coarse stage, we employ a Bi-directional Gaussian Mixture Model (BGMM) to reject outlier points and obtain purified point cloud pairs. BGMM establishes correspondences between the Gaussian Mixture Models (GMMs) from the source and target frames, enabling reliable coarse registration based on filtered features and geometric information. In the fine stage, we treat diffusion-based PCR as an autoregressive process to generate robust point correspondences, which are then iteratively refined on upper layers. Despite common criticisms of diffusion-based methods regarding inference speed, EADReg achieves runtime comparable to convolutional-based methods. Extensive experiments on the KITTI and NuScenes benchmark datasets highlight the state-of-the-art performance of our proposed method. Codes will be released upon publication.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15271 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Comparison with previous Diffusion PCR methods. Previous diffusion-based PCR methods directly generate global dense point-to-point (P2P) correspondences Ct ∈ R NS×NT , re￾sulting in high training costs. In contrast, our proposed EADReg predicts correspondences within the top-K nearest neighbors of the source points Cˆ ∈ R NS×K, leveraging reliable coarse regis￾tration. Besides, We integrate an autoregressive framewo… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The detector-descriptor backbone hierarchically downsamples the input point cloud pairs and extracts corresponding features. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Qualitative visualization of registration performance. From left to right, we compare our proposed method with HRegNet using [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: We select four samples from the KITTI dataset to illus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Safe and Efficient Lane-Changing for Autonomous Vehicles: An Improved Double Quintic Polynomial Approach with Time-to-Collision Evaluation

    cs.RO 2025-08 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

    An optimization-based double quintic lane-change planner that penalizes low time-to-collision is proposed and tested in simulation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 56 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Belfusion: Latent diffusion for behavior-driven human mo- tion prediction

    German Barquero, Sergio Escalera, and Cristina Palmero. Belfusion: Latent diffusion for behavior-driven human mo- tion prediction. In 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), page 2317–2327. IEEE, 2023. 2, 3, 5

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Method for registration of 3-d shapes

    Paul J Besl and Neil D McKay. Method for registration of 3-d shapes. In Sensor fusion IV: control paradigms and data structures, pages 586–606. Spie, 1992. 2, 6, 7

    work page 1992

  3. [3]

    nuscenes: A multi- modal dataset for autonomous driving

    Holger Caesar, Varun Bankiti, Alex H Lang, Sourabh V ora, Venice Erin Liong, Qiang Xu, Anush Krishnan, Yu Pan, Gi- ancarlo Baldan, and Oscar Beijbom. nuscenes: A multi- modal dataset for autonomous driving. In Proceedings of 11 the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 11621–11631, 2020. 5

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Lcd- net: Deep loop closure detection and point cloud registra- tion for lidar slam

    Daniele Cattaneo, Matteo Vaghi, and Abhinav Valada. Lcd- net: Deep loop closure detection and point cloud registra- tion for lidar slam. IEEE Transactions on Robotics , 38(4): 2074–2093, 2022. 1

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Rethinking point cloud registration as mask- ing and reconstruction

    Guangyan Chen, Meiling Wang, Li Yuan, Yi Yang, and Yufeng Yue. Rethinking point cloud registration as mask- ing and reconstruction. In 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), page 17671–17681. IEEE, 2023. 2, 3

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Utopic: Uncertainty-aware overlap prediction network for partial point cloud registration

    Zhilei Chen, Honghua Chen, Lina Gong, Xuefeng Yan, Jun Wang, Yanwen Guo, Jing Qin, and Mingqiang Wei. Utopic: Uncertainty-aware overlap prediction network for partial point cloud registration. Computer Graphics Forum, 41(7):87–98, 2022. 2, 3

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Diffusion- pcr: Diffusion models for robust multi-step point cloud reg- istration

    Zhi Chen, Yufan Ren, Tong Zhang, Zheng Dang, Wenbing Tao, Sabine S ¨usstrunk, and Mathieu Salzmann. Diffusion- pcr: Diffusion models for robust multi-step point cloud reg- istration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.03053, 2023. 1, 2, 3

    arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Deep global registration

    Christopher Choy, Wei Dong, and Vladlen Koltun. Deep global registration. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF con- ference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 2514–2523, 2020. 6, 7, 8

    work page 2020

Show all 69 references
  1. [9]

    Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the em al- gorithm

    Arthur P Dempster, Nan M Laird, and Donald B Rubin. Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the em al- gorithm. Journal of the royal statistical society: series B (methodological), 39(1):1–22, 1977. 3

    1977

  2. [10]

    Trafficcam: A versatile dataset for traffic flow seg- mentation

    Zhongying Deng, Yanqi Chen, Lihao Liu, Shujun Wang, Ri- huan Ke, Carola-Bibiane Schonlieb, and Angelica I Aviles- Rivero. Trafficcam: A versatile dataset for traffic flow seg- mentation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.09620, 2022. 1

    2022 arXiv

  3. [11]

    3d point cloud registration for localization using a deep neural net- work auto-encoder

    Gil Elbaz, Tamar Avraham, and Anath Fischer. 3d point cloud registration for localization using a deep neural net- work auto-encoder. In 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, 2017. 1

    2017

  4. [12]

    A generative model for the joint registration of multiple point sets

    Georgios D Evangelidis, Dionyssos Kounades-Bastian, Radu Horaud, and Emmanouil Z Psarakis. A generative model for the joint registration of multiple point sets. InEuropean con- ference on computer vision, pages 109–122. Springer, 2014. 3

    2014

  5. [13]

    Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography.Communications of the ACM, 24(6):381–395, 1981

    Martin A Fischler and Robert C Bolles. Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography.Communications of the ACM, 24(6):381–395, 1981. 2, 6, 7

    1981

  6. [14]

    Filterreg: Robust and efficient probabilistic point-set registration using gaussian filter and twist parameterization

    Wei Gao and Russ Tedrake. Filterreg: Robust and efficient probabilistic point-set registration using gaussian filter and twist parameterization. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 11095–11104, 2019. 3

    2019

  7. [15]

    Are we ready for autonomous driving? the kitti vision benchmark suite

    Andreas Geiger, Philip Lenz, and Raquel Urtasun. Are we ready for autonomous driving? the kitti vision benchmark suite. In 2012 IEEE conference on computer vision and pat- tern recognition, pages 3354–3361. IEEE, 2012. 5

    2012

  8. [16]

    Amd: Autoregressive motion diffusion

    Bo Han, Hao Peng, Minjing Dong, Yi Ren, Yixuan Shen, and Chang Xu. Amd: Autoregressive motion diffusion. In Pro- ceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence , pages 2022–2030, 2024. 3

    2022

  9. [17]

    Unsupervised semantic correspondence using stable diffu- sion

    Eric Hedlin, Gopal Sharma, Shweta Mahajan, Hossam Isack, Abhishek Kar, Andrea Tagliasacchi, and Kwang Moo Yi. Unsupervised semantic correspondence using stable diffu- sion. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , 36, 2024. 3

    2024

  10. [18]

    A point cloud registration pipeline using gaussian process regression for bathymetric slam

    Thomas Hitchcox and James Richard Forbes. A point cloud registration pipeline using gaussian process regression for bathymetric slam. In 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Confer- ence on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2020. 1

    2020

  11. [19]

    Denoising diffu- sion probabilistic models

    Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffu- sion probabilistic models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:6840–6851, 2020. 3

    2020

  12. [20]

    Imagen video: High definition video generation with diffusion mod- els

    Jonathan Ho, William Chan, Chitwan Saharia, Jay Whang, Ruiqi Gao, Alexey Gritsenko, Diederik P Kingma, Ben Poole, Mohammad Norouzi, David J Fleet, et al. Imagen video: High definition video generation with diffusion mod- els. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02303, 2022. 2

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    Autore- gressive diffusion models

    Emiel Hoogeboom, Alexey A Gritsenko, Jasmijn Bastings, Ben Poole, Rianne van den Berg, and Tim Salimans. Autore- gressive diffusion models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.02037,

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    Feature- metric registration: A fast semi-supervised approach for ro- bust point cloud registration without correspondences

    Xiaoshui Huang, Guofeng Mei, and Jian Zhang. Feature- metric registration: A fast semi-supervised approach for ro- bust point cloud registration without correspondences. In 2020 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, 2020. 6, 7

    2020

  15. [23]

    Motiondif- fuser: Controllable multi-agent motion prediction using dif- fusion

    Chiyu “Max” Jiang, Andre Cornman, Cheolho Park, Ben- jamin Sapp, Yin Zhou, and Dragomir Anguelov. Motiondif- fuser: Controllable multi-agent motion prediction using dif- fusion. In 2023 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, 2023. 2

    2023

  16. [24]

    Se3diffusion model-based point cloud registration for robust 6d object pose estimation

    Haobo Jiang, Mathieu Salzmann, Zheng Dang, Jin Xie, and Jian Yang. Se3diffusion model-based point cloud registration for robust 6d object pose estimation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 2, 3

    2024

  17. [25]

    Navigation sys- tem for orchard spraying robot based on 3d lidar slam with ndt-icp point cloud registration

    Saike Jiang, Peng Qi, Leng Han, Limin Liu, Yangfan Li, Zhan Huang, Yajia Liu, and Xiongkui He. Navigation sys- tem for orchard spraying robot based on 3d lidar slam with ndt-icp point cloud registration. 2023. 1

    2023

  18. [26]

    Cho, and Junsuk Kang

    Pileun Kim, Jisoo Park, Yong K. Cho, and Junsuk Kang. Uav-assisted autonomous mobile robot navigation for as-is 3d data collection and registration in cluttered environments. Automation in Construction, 106:102918, 2019. 1

    2019

  19. [27]

    Usip: Unsupervised stable inter- est point detection from 3d point clouds

    Jiaxin Li and Gim Hee Lee. Usip: Unsupervised stable inter- est point detection from 3d point clouds. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 361–370, 2019. 6

    2019

  20. [28]

    Iterative distance-aware similarity matrix convo- lution with mutual-supervised point elimination for efficient point cloud registration

    Jiahao Li, Changhao Zhang, Ziyao Xu, Hangning Zhou, and Chi Zhang. Iterative distance-aware similarity matrix convo- lution with mutual-supervised point elimination for efficient point cloud registration. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, Aug...

    2020

  21. [29]

    Lepard: Learning partial point cloud matching in rigid and deformable scenes

    Yang Li and Tatsuya Harada. Lepard: Learning partial point cloud matching in rigid and deformable scenes. In 12 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pat- tern Recognition (CVPR). IEEE, 2022. 2

    2022

  22. [30]

    Flycore: Fast low-frequency coarse registration of large-scale outdoor lidar point clouds

    Zikuan Li, Kaijun Zhang, Zhoutao Wang, Sibo Wu, Xiao- Ping Zhang, Mingqiang Wei, and Jun Wang. Flycore: Fast low-frequency coarse registration of large-scale outdoor lidar point clouds. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 2024. 6, 7

    2024

  23. [31]

    Translo: A window-based masked point transformer framework for large-scale lidar odometry

    Jiuming Liu, Guangming Wang, Chaokang Jiang, Zhe Liu, and Hesheng Wang. Translo: A window-based masked point transformer framework for large-scale lidar odometry. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelli- gence, pages 1683–1691, 2023. 1

    2023

  24. [32]

    Regformer: An effi- cient projection-aware transformer network for large-scale point cloud registration

    Jiuming Liu, Guangming Wang, Zhe Liu, Chaokang Jiang, Marc Pollefeys, and Hesheng Wang. Regformer: An effi- cient projection-aware transformer network for large-scale point cloud registration. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 84...

    2023

  25. [33]

    Mamba4d: Efficient long-sequence point cloud video understanding with disentangled spatial-temporal state space models

    Jiuming Liu, Jinru Han, Lihao Liu, Angelica I Aviles-Rivero, Chaokang Jiang, Zhe Liu, and Hesheng Wang. Mamba4d: Efficient long-sequence point cloud video understanding with disentangled spatial-temporal state space models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14338, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Difflow3d: Toward robust uncertainty-aware scene flow estimation with iterative diffusion-based refine- ment

    Jiuming Liu, Guangming Wang, Weicai Ye, Chaokang Jiang, Jinru Han, Zhe Liu, Guofeng Zhang, Dalong Du, and Hes- heng Wang. Difflow3d: Toward robust uncertainty-aware scene flow estimation with iterative diffusion-based refine- ment. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on ...

  27. [35]

    Dvlo: Deep visual-lidar odometry with local-to-global feature fusion and bi-directional structure alignment

    Jiuming Liu, Dong Zhuo, Zhiheng Feng, Siting Zhu, Chen- sheng Peng, Zhe Liu, and Hesheng Wang. Dvlo: Deep visual-lidar odometry with local-to-global feature fusion and bi-directional structure alignment. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 475–493. Springer, 2025. 1

    2025

  28. [36]

    Contrastive registration for unsupervised medical image segmentation

    Lihao Liu, Angelica I Aviles-Rivero, and Carola-Bibiane Sch¨onlieb. Contrastive registration for unsupervised medical image segmentation. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, 2023. 2

    2023

  29. [37]

    Traffic video object detection using motion prior

    Lihao Liu, Yanqi Cheng, Dongdong Chen, Jing He, Pietro Li`o, Carola-Bibiane Sch ¨onlieb, and Angelica I Aviles- Rivero. Traffic video object detection using motion prior. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.10092, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Rskdd-net: Random sample-based keypoint detector and descriptor

    Fan Lu, Guang Chen, Yinlong Liu, Zhongnan Qu, and Alois Knoll. Rskdd-net: Random sample-based keypoint detector and descriptor. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:21297–21308, 2020. 6

    2020

  31. [39]

    Hregnet: A hierarchical network for efficient and accurate outdoor lidar point cloud registration

    Fan Lu, Guang Chen, Yinlong Liu, Lijun Zhang, Sanqing Qu, Shu Liu, Rongqi Gu, and Changjun Jiang. Hregnet: A hierarchical network for efficient and accurate outdoor lidar point cloud registration. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Anal- ysis and Machine Intelligence , 45(10):11884–...

    2023

  32. [40]

    L3-net: Towards learning based lidar lo- calization for autonomous driving

    Weixin Lu, Yao Zhou, Guowei Wan, Shenhua Hou, and Shiyu Song. L3-net: Towards learning based lidar lo- calization for autonomous driving. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 6389–6398, 2019. 5

    2019

  33. [41]

    Diffusion hyperfeatures: Searching through time and space for semantic correspondence

    Grace Luo, Lisa Dunlap, Dong Huk Park, Aleksander Holyn- ski, and Trevor Darrell. Diffusion hyperfeatures: Searching through time and space for semantic correspondence. Ad- vances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 3

    2024

  34. [42]

    The pose estimation of mobile robot based on improved point cloud registration

    Yanzi Miao, Yang Liu, Hongbin Ma, and Huijie Jin. The pose estimation of mobile robot based on improved point cloud registration. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 13(2):52, 2016. 1

    2016

  35. [43]

    Diffu- sion model for dense matching

    Jisu Nam, Gyuseong Lee, Sunwoo Kim, Hyeonsu Kim, Hy- oungwon Cho, Seyeon Kim, and Seungryong Kim. Diffu- sion model for dense matching. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations. 2, 3

  36. [44]

    A Review of Point Cloud Registration Algorithms for Mobile Robotics

    Franc ¸ois Pomerleau, Francis Colas, and Roland Siegwart. A Review of Point Cloud Registration Algorithms for Mobile Robotics. now Publishers Inc, 2015. 1

    2015

  37. [45]

    Pointnet: Deep learning on point sets for 3d classification and segmentation

    Charles R Qi, Hao Su, Kaichun Mo, and Leonidas J Guibas. Pointnet: Deep learning on point sets for 3d classification and segmentation. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 652–660,

  38. [46]

    G3reg: Pyramid graph-based global registra- tion using gaussian ellipsoid model

    Zhijian Qiao, Zehuan Yu, Binqian Jiang, Huan Yin, and Shaojie Shen. G3reg: Pyramid graph-based global registra- tion using gaussian ellipsoid model. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 2024. 3

    2024

  39. [47]

    Geotrans- former: Fast and robust point cloud registration with geo- metric transformer

    Zheng Qin, Hao Yu, Changjian Wang, Yulan Guo, Yuxing Peng, Slobodan Ilic, Dewen Hu, and Kai Xu. Geotrans- former: Fast and robust point cloud registration with geo- metric transformer. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(8):9806–9821, 2023. 1, 2, 4, 6

    2023

  40. [48]

    Pointdifformer: Robust point cloud registration with neural diffusion and trans- former

    Rui She, Qiyu Kang, Sijie Wang, Wee Peng Tay, Kai Zhao, Yang Song, Tianyu Geng, Yi Xu, Diego Navarro Navarro, and Andreas Hartmannsgruber. Pointdifformer: Robust point cloud registration with neural diffusion and trans- former. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sens- ...

    2024

  41. [49]

    Denois- ing diffusion implicit models

    Jiaming Song, Chenlin Meng, and Stefano Ermon. Denois- ing diffusion implicit models. 2020. 6

    2020

  42. [50]

    Practical, fast and robust point cloud registration for scene stitching and object localization

    Lei Sun. Practical, fast and robust point cloud registration for scene stitching and object localization. IEEE Access, 10: 3962–3978, 2022. 1

    2022

  43. [51]

    Prompting Future Driven Diffusion Model for Hand Motion Prediction , page 169–186

    Bowen Tang, Kaihao Zhang, Wenhan Luo, Wei Liu, and Hongdong Li. Prompting Future Driven Diffusion Model for Hand Motion Prediction , page 169–186. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024. 2, 3, 5

    2024

  44. [52]

    Qi, Jean-Emmanuel Deschaud, Beatriz Marcotegui, Francois Goulette, and Leonidas Guibas

    Hugues Thomas, Charles R. Qi, Jean-Emmanuel Deschaud, Beatriz Marcotegui, Francois Goulette, and Leonidas Guibas. Kpconv: Flexible and deformable convolution for point clouds. In 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE, 2019. 2

    2019

  45. [53]

    Karen Liu

    Tom Van Wouwe, Seunghwan Lee, Antoine Falisse, Scott Delp, and C. Karen Liu. Diffusionposer: Real-time hu- man motion reconstruction from arbitrary sparse sensors us- ing autoregressive diffusion. In 2024 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) , ...

    2024

  46. [54]

    Optimal transport: old and new

    C ´edric Villani et al. Optimal transport: old and new . Springer, 2009. 5 13

    2009

  47. [55]

    Roreg: Pairwise point cloud registration with oriented descriptors and local rotations

    Haiping Wang, Yuan Liu, Qingyong Hu, Bing Wang, Jian- guo Chen, Zhen Dong, Yulan Guo, Wenping Wang, and Bisheng Yang. Roreg: Pairwise point cloud registration with oriented descriptors and local rotations. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(8):1...

    2023

  48. [56]

    Posediffusion: Solving pose estimation via diffusion-aided bundle adjustment

    Jianyuan Wang, Christian Rupprecht, and David Novotny. Posediffusion: Solving pose estimation via diffusion-aided bundle adjustment. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Inter- national Conference on Computer Vision, pages 9773–9783,

  49. [57]

    Deep closest point: Learn- ing representations for point cloud registration

    Yue Wang and Justin Solomon. Deep closest point: Learn- ing representations for point cloud registration. In 2019 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV). IEEE, 2019. 6, 7

    2019

  50. [58]

    Diff-pcr: Diffusion-based correspondence searching in doubly stochastic matrix space for point cloud registration

    Qianliang Wu, Haobo Jiang, Yaqing Ding, Lei Luo, Jin Xie, and Jian Yang. Diff-pcr: Diffusion-based correspondence searching in doubly stochastic matrix space for point cloud registration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.00436, 2023. 2, 3, 4

    2023 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Ar-diffusion: Auto-regressive diffusion model for text generation

    Tong Wu, Zhihao Fan, Xiao Liu, Hai-Tao Zheng, Yeyun Gong, Jian Jiao, Juntao Li, Jian Guo, Nan Duan, Weizhu Chen, et al. Ar-diffusion: Auto-regressive diffusion model for text generation. Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems, 36:39957–39974, 2023. 3

    2023

  52. [60]

    Part-in-whole point cloud registration for aircraft partial scan automated local- ization

    Qian Xie, Yiming Zhang, Xuanming Cao, Yabin Xu, Den- ing Lu, HongHua Chen, and Jun Wang. Part-in-whole point cloud registration for aircraft partial scan automated local- ization. Computer-Aided Design, 137:103042, 2021. 1

    2021

  53. [61]

    Omnet: Learning overlapping mask for partial- to-partial point cloud registration

    Hao Xu, Shuaicheng Liu, Guangfu Wang, Guanghui Liu, and Bing Zeng. Omnet: Learning overlapping mask for partial- to-partial point cloud registration. In 2021 IEEE/CVF In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , page 3112–3121. IEEE, 2021. 2, 3

    2021

  54. [62]

    Hdmnet: A hierarchi- cal matching network with double attention for large-scale outdoor lidar point cloud registration

    Weiyi Xue, Fan Lu, and Guang Chen. Hdmnet: A hierarchi- cal matching network with double attention for large-scale outdoor lidar point cloud registration. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pages 3393–3403, 2024. 6, 7

    2024

  55. [63]

    Cofinet: Reliable coarse-to-fine correspondences for robust pointcloud registration

    Hao Yu, Fu Li, Mahdi Saleh, Benjamin Busam, and Slobo- dan Ilic. Cofinet: Reliable coarse-to-fine correspondences for robust pointcloud registration. Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 34:23872–23884, 2021. 4

    2021

  56. [64]

    Deepgmr: Learning la- tent gaussian mixture models for registration

    Wentao Yuan, Benjamin Eckart, Kihwan Kim, Varun Jam- pani, Dieter Fox, and Jan Kautz. Deepgmr: Learning la- tent gaussian mixture models for registration. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part V 16 , pages 73...

    2020

  57. [65]

    Re- modiffuse: Retrieval-augmented motion diffusion model

    Mingyuan Zhang, Xinying Guo, Liang Pan, Zhongang Cai, Fangzhou Hong, Huirong Li, Lei Yang, and Ziwei Liu. Re- modiffuse: Retrieval-augmented motion diffusion model. In 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion (ICCV). IEEE, 2023. 2

    2023

  58. [66]

    Point transformer

    Hengshuang Zhao, Li Jiang, Jiaya Jia, Philip HS Torr, and Vladlen Koltun. Point transformer. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 16259–16268, 2021. 2

    2021

  59. [67]

    Fast global registration

    Qian-Yi Zhou, Jaesik Park, and Vladlen Koltun. Fast global registration. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2016: 14th Euro- pean Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 11- 14, 2016, Proceedings, Part II 14, pages 766–782. Springer,

    2016

  60. [68]

    Da4ad: End-to-end deep attention-based visual localization for autonomous driving

    Yao Zhou, Guowei Wan, Shenhua Hou, Li Yu, Gang Wang, Xiaofei Rui, and Shiyu Song. Da4ad: End-to-end deep attention-based visual localization for autonomous driving. In Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Confer- ence, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XXV...

    2020

  61. [69]

    Learn- ing homeomorphic image registration via conformal- invariant hyperelastic regularisation

    Jing Zou, No ´emie Debroux, Lihao Liu, Jing Qin, Carola- Bibiane Sch ¨onlieb, and Angelica I Aviles-Rivero. Learn- ing homeomorphic image registration via conformal- invariant hyperelastic regularisation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08113, 2023. 1 14

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

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