Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Depth3DLane: Monocular 3D Lane Detection via Depth Prior Distillation

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Monocular 3D lane detection improves by distilling depth priors into a three-stage BEV pipeline.

desk verdict Promising three-stage 3D lane detection paper whose headline 88 FPS and SOTA claims are undermined by a test-time dependency on Depth Anything V2 that is never accounted for in the runtime or compared fairly against baselines. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18325 v2 pith:C2AMDREE submitted 2025-04-25 cs.CV

Dongxin Lyu , Han Huang , Cheng Tan , Zimu Li This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CV
keywords 3Dlanedetectionmonoculardepthestimationknowledgedistillationbird's-eyeviewconditionalrandomfieldinverseperspectivemappingautonomousdrivingprior
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 claims that monocular 3D lane detection can be made substantially more accurate by replacing the flat-ground BEV assumption with explicit depth modeling, and that this can be done without sacrificing real-time speed. Its three-stage pipeline first deconstructs the BEV representation with a depth-aware head, then injects depth priors distilled from a large pretrained monocular depth model, then refines lane geometry with a conditional random field. On the ApolloSim synthetic benchmark the method reaches 98.9% F1 in the balanced split and 99.2% in the rare split; on the real-world OpenLane benchmark it surpasses prior state-of-the-art F1 scores while reporting far-range height errors around 0.1 m. A sympathetic reader would care because height error at long distance is the known weak spot of IPM-based detectors and is safety-relevant for autonomous driving.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the three-stage deconstruct-inject-refine pipeline. The DSD head is a U-Net-like module trained to reconstruct a dense depth map with a combined SSIM plus scale-invariant logarithmic loss, so the backbone learns multi-scale depth features even though the decoder is removed at inference. The CPI module distills teacher depth features at two scales (S32 and S64) and fuses them with backbone features by concatenation. The GCR enforces lane coherence by minimizing an energy composed of a unary term from predicted lane probability and pairwise Gaussian kernels on color and depth similarity, one independent CRF per lane initiated from the lane's baseline pixel. Together these components are meant to supply what IPM lacks: explicit height awareness, contextual depth priors, and spatial continuity.

What would settle it

Inspect the released training code to see what dense depth targets feed Eq. (2) on OpenLane, then rerun training with that loss term removed and compare far-range z-error: if the gain vanishes, the claim depends on an undisclosed depth source.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Depth3DLane is a three-stage monocular 3D lane detection framework whose central claim is that explicitly modeling vertical structure, rather than relying on inverse perspective mapping's flat-ground assumption, resolves depth ambiguity and improves 3D localization, especially the z-axis at far range. Stage one, the Depth Structure Deconstruction head, is a U-Net-style encoder-decoder that produces a dense depth map under SSIM and scale-invariant log supervision, forcing the backbone to encode road geometry. Stage two, Contextual Prior Injection, distills features from deep layers of Depth Anything V2 into two student modules at different scales and concatenates them with backbone features. Stage three, Geometric Coherence Refiner, builds one conditional random field per lane, using unary prediction probability plus color- and depth-based pairwise potentials, to smooth keypoint outputs. The paper reports an F1 of 98.9% on the balanced ApolloSim split and 64.7% with a Swin-B backbone on OpenLane, with the lowest x- and z-axis far-range errors among compared methods.

Load-bearing premise

The dense depth maps used to supervise the DSD head in Eq. (2) must exist for every training image, but the paper never states their source and OpenLane does not provide them.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Far-range height error (z-Err/F) drops below prior methods on both ApolloSim and OpenLane, so the approach targets exactly the failure mode of flat-ground IPM.
  • The auxiliary depth decoder is discarded at inference, so the depth supervision improves accuracy without slowing the real-time system (88 FPS on ResNet-34).
  • Multi-scale distillation from the teacher's deep layers (S32+S64) beats any single scale, so complementary mid- and high-level depth features both matter.
  • The per-lane CRF with color and depth potentials raises F1 and smoothness, suggesting keypoint discontinuity can be fixed by lightweight structured refinement.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same deconstruct-inject-refine recipe could transfer to other monocular BEV perception tasks where the flat-ground assumption hurts, such as 3D object detection or road-surface estimation, though the paper does not test this.
  • Because the paper never identifies the source of dense depth supervision for Eq. (2), a fair reading is that it may depend on pseudo-depth from the teacher itself; if so, the reported gains could partly reflect self-distillation rather than new geometric information, a point the authors do not address.
  • A cheap testable extension would be to freeze the trained backbone and apply the GCR CRF to other keypoint-based 3D lane detectors' outputs to see if the coherence gain is detector-agnostic.
  • The teacher's layers 17 and 23 are chosen without stated justification; ablating layer choice might reveal whether distillation depth, rather than feature scale, drives the improvement.
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

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Depth3DLane, a monocular 3D lane detection framework that combines three stages: a Depth Structure Deconstruction (DSD) head that reconstructs a dense depth map during training, a Contextual Prior Injection (CPI) module that distills features from Depth Anything V2 into lightweight student modules, and a Geometric Coherence Refiner (GCR) implemented as a per-lane Conditional Random Field. The framework is evaluated on Apollo Synthetic and OpenLane, reporting an F1-score of 98.9% on ApolloSim, an F1-score of 64.7% on OpenLane with a Swin-B backbone, and 88 FPS with a ResNet-34 backbone. The authors claim state-of-the-art overall performance, particularly in far-range z-axis error, and provide a code repository.

Significance. If the reported results are correct and reproducible, the paper makes a useful engineering contribution: it demonstrates that multi-scale feature distillation from a generic depth model, combined with explicit height-aware decoding and a CRF refinement stage, can improve 3D lane detection accuracy and far-range depth error relative to several strong baselines. The work is evaluated on two standard benchmarks and includes ablations of the three proposed modules. The authors also release code, which is a positive step for reproducibility. However, the significance is currently limited by three unresolved issues: the source of the dense depth supervision used to train the DSD head is not disclosed, the GCR appears to require a forward pass through Depth Anything V2 at test time without accounting for that latency in the reported FPS, and the main OpenLane comparison omits several recent methods cited in the paper. These issues prevent the reader from verifying the state-of-the-art and real-time claims as written.

major comments (5)
  1. [§3.1, Eq. (2)] The DSD head is trained with a dense depth loss L_depth = α L_SSIM + β L_SiLog on a reconstructed depth map D_initial, but the paper never states where the dense depth supervision comes from. OpenLane provides sparse 3D lane points and camera poses, not dense depth maps. If the depth maps are pseudo-labels from Depth Anything V2, then Stage 1 is not an independent geometric prior and the separation between DSD and CPI is partially conflated; if they are rendered from lane annotations, the supervision is sparse. This omission makes the training pipeline unreproducible and the ablation of DSD in Table 5 uninterpretable. The authors must specify the depth source, or remove the dense depth loss and retrain.
  2. [§3.3, Eq. (6); Tables 2 and 5] Equation (6) defines the pairwise depth potential p_depth using 'the output from the Depth Anything V2 model,' and the GCR is the final inference-time refinement stage. This implies that every test image requires a forward pass through an external pretrained depth network. The paper reports 88 FPS in Table 2 and various FPS values in Table 5 without stating whether this external forward pass is included. No listed baseline uses such an external network at test time, so the comparison is not end-to-end if DA V2 is executed. If DA V2 is not executed at inference, then Eq. (6) and the surrounding text are incorrect and the GCR ablation loses its meaning. The authors must clarify the test-time depth source, report end-to-end FPS including all test-time dependencies, or modify the GCR to use the student's own depth output.
  3. [§4.2, Table 2] The main OpenLane comparison omits several recent methods that are cited and discussed in the paper, including DV-3DLane (Luo et al. 2024), CurveFormer++ (Bai et al. 2024), and HeightLane (Park et al. 2024). DV-3DLane appears only in the ApolloSim table, and HeightLane is only in the reference list. Without these methods, the abstract's claim of 'surpassing previous state-of-the-art methods in overall performance' is not supported by the presented evidence. The authors should add these methods to the OpenLane comparison or explicitly limit the claim to the methods actually compared.
  4. [§3.3, Eq. (6); Table 5] The CRF hyperparameters are not reported anywhere: the weights ω2 and ω3, the kernel widths σ_color and σ_depth, and the number of mean-field iterations are all absent. Since the GCR is a post-processing stage and its entire contribution is measured in the ablation of Table 5, these details are necessary for reproducibility and for understanding the sensitivity of the claimed improvement. The paper should provide the full set of CRF settings.
  5. [§4.4, Table 5] The module ablation in Table 5 has no row without any of the three modules. Each row contains at least one of DSD, CPI, or GCR, so the table shows relative differences between module combinations but not the absolute gain over a baseline network. The conclusion that 'each stage systematically addresses a key challenge' requires a no-module baseline. Please add this row or otherwise quantify the additive contribution of each stage.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1, Table 1] The text says the ApolloSim evaluation covers 'three distinct split settings,' but Table 1 shows only two scene groups (Balanced Scene and Rarely Observed). Please correct the wording or add the missing split.
  2. [§4.3, Table 4 discussion] The sentence describing the three-scale combination refers to 'a significant improvement in angular precision (z-Err/F(m) = 0.103),' but z-Err/F is a depth error, not an angular metric. Please rephrase.
  3. [§4.2, Table 3 discussion] The text states that 'Our method consistently outperformed previous approaches' across challenging scenarios, but the ResNet-34 row in Table 3 shows lower F1 than PV ALane in Extreme Weather (55.7 vs. 62.0) and Night (56.2 vs. 57.2), and lower F1 than LATR in Extreme Weather. Please temper the claim to match the table.
  4. [§3.2, Eq. (4)] The notation L_s32_mse and L_s64_mse is introduced without defining the student feature maps. Please define S32 and S64 explicitly and align the notation with Figure 2 and Table 4.
  5. [References] Several references cite only the first author followed by 'et al.' without the full author list (e.g., Luo et al. 2024, Zheng et al. 2024, Pittner et al. 2024). Please provide complete citation information for verification.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the contribution is evaluated against external benchmarks and the depth prior is an external pretrained model, not a result derived from the paper's own outputs.

full rationale

The paper's three-stage pipeline (DSD, CPI, GCR) is supervised by lane labels from OpenLane and ApolloSim, auxiliary depth reconstruction losses, and feature distillation from the external Depth Anything V2 model. The primary lane loss (Eq. 7) and total loss (Eq. 8) do not define any predicted quantity in terms of the evaluation target; the ablation studies in Table 5 isolate each module's contribution against held-out benchmark labels. The GCR pairwise depth potential in Eq. 6 uses Depth Anything V2 depth estimates at inference, which is an external-model dependency and a legitimate concern for fairness, runtime, and reproducibility, but it is not circular: the depth values are not computed from the paper's own lane predictions, and the method's central claim—that the proposed architecture improves 3D lane detection—is not reduced to the teacher's output by construction. The paper adopts the Virtual Camera concept from BEV-LaneDet (Wang et al. 2023), but that is a standard, independently published baseline component, not a self-citation carrying the load of the claimed contribution. No uniqueness theorem, ansatz, or fitted parameter is imported from the authors' own prior work to force the result. Therefore the derivation chain is self-contained with respect to the paper's inputs, and any criticism should be framed as a correctness/comparison issue, not circularity.

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

The central claims depend on a large set of hand-set loss weights and architecture choices, plus the unstated availability of dense depth supervision. None of these parameters are derived from theory, and the most load-bearing one, the depth ground truth source for OpenLane, is not disclosed. The paper's contribution is therefore an empirical system with many fitted knobs, not a derivation.

free parameters (6)
  • Depth loss weights alpha, beta = alpha=0.3, beta=1.0
    Hyperparameters in Eq. (2) balancing SSIM and SiLog terms; chosen by hand, no sensitivity analysis reported.
  • Distillation weights lambda_mse, lambda_cos = lambda_mse=1.0, lambda_cos=0.5
    Weights for MSE and cosine feature alignment in Eq. (4), set without reported tuning procedure.
  • Lane loss weights = lambda3d_conf=3.0, lambda3d_embed=0.5, lambda3d_offset=60, lambda3d_height=30, lambda2d_seg=1.5, lambda2d_embed=0.25
    Weights in Eq. (7) for six lane prediction losses; chosen by the authors, no ablation or sensitivity shown.
  • Total loss weights lambda_lane, lambda_depth, lambda_distill = all set to 1.0
    Balance terms in Eq. (8); no ablation reported.
  • CRF unary/pairwise weights and kernel widths = omega1, omega2, omega3, sigma_color, sigma_depth: not reported
    Eqs. (5)-(6) define the CRF energy with these parameters, but no values are given anywhere; the GCR ablation is therefore not reproducible.
  • Distillation scale and layer choices = S32+S64, teacher layers 17 and 23
    Selected by ablation (Table 4) as the best combination; an architecture choice fitted to validation performance.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Dense depth ground truth is available for every training image in both ApolloSim and OpenLane to supervise the DSD head.
    Required for Eq. (2) but the source is not stated; OpenLane does not provide dense depth labels, so this assumption is unverified and possibly false.
  • domain assumption The BEV spatial transformation retains enough information that height offsets predicted from image features can correct flat-ground errors.
    The whole DSD stage is premised on this; the paper does not analyze failure cases such as overpasses or non-height-field road geometry.
  • ad hoc to paper Depth Anything V2's intermediate features transfer to 3D lane geometry in BEV coordinates.
    The CPI module distills layers 17 and 23; the paper offers no analysis of why these layers are informative for lane depth, and the choice is validated only by ablation.
  • domain assumption Ground truth lane labels and camera poses in both datasets are accurate enough to serve as training and evaluation targets.
    Standard assumption in benchmark papers; no quality analysis is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper The CRF mean-field inference (or equivalent) converges to a better solution than the raw network output for lane smoothness.
    The GCR adds only 0.2 F1 over DSD+CPI in Table 5; the paper does not prove or analyze when refinement helps or hurts.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Depth3DLane: Monocular 3D Lane Detection via Depth Prior Distillation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/C2AMDREE

@misc{pith2026250418325,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Depth3DLane: Monocular 3D Lane Detection via Depth Prior Distillation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/C2AMDREE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18325}
}
read the original abstract

Monocular 3D lane detection is challenging due to the difficulty in capturing depth information from single-camera images. A common strategy involves transforming front-view (FV) images into bird's-eye-view (BEV) space through inverse perspective mapping (IPM), facilitating lane detection using BEV features. However, IPM's flat-ground assumption and loss of contextual information lead to inaccuracies in reconstructing 3D information, especially height. In this paper, we introduce a BEV-based framework to address these limitations and improve 3D lane detection accuracy. Our approach incorporates a Hierarchical Depth-Aware Head that provides multi-scale depth features, mitigating the flat-ground assumption by enhancing spatial awareness across varying depths. Additionally, we leverage Depth Prior Distillation to transfer semantic depth knowledge from a teacher model, capturing richer structural and contextual information for complex lane structures. To further refine lane continuity and ensure smooth lane reconstruction, we introduce a Conditional Random Field module that enforces spatial coherence in lane predictions. Extensive experiments validate that our method achieves state-of-the-art performance in terms of z-axis error and outperforms other methods in the field in overall performance. The code is released at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/Depth3DLane-DCDD.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18325 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) BEV-based methods convert front-view images [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of the proposed Depth3DLane framework, which follows a three-stage pipeline. First, input images are [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Geometric Coherence Refiner mechanism. An in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative comparison between our proposed Depth3DLane and BEV-LaneDet (Wang et al. 2023) on the OpenLane [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 global.max substring 't := if while FUNCTION format.date year duplicate empty "emp...

  2. [2]

    Ws-3d-lane: Weakly supervised 3d lane detection with 2d lane labels

    Jianyong Ai, Wenbo Ding, Jiuhua Zhao, and Jiachen Zhong. Ws-3d-lane: Weakly supervised 3d lane detection with 2d lane labels. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 5595--5601. IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Curveformer: 3d lane detection by curve propagation with curve queries and attention

    Yifeng Bai, Zhirong Chen, Zhangjie Fu, Lang Peng, Pengpeng Liang, and Erkang Cheng. Curveformer: 3d lane detection by curve propagation with curve queries and attention. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 7062--7068. IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Curveformer++: 3d lane detection by curve propagation with temporal curve queries and attention

    Yifeng Bai, Zhirong Chen, Pengpeng Liang, and Erkang Cheng. Curveformer++: 3d lane detection by curve propagation with temporal curve queries and attention. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06423, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    A multi-task vision transformer for segmentation and monocular depth estimation for autonomous vehicles

    Durga Prasad Bavirisetti, Herman Ryen Martinsen, Gabriel Hanssen Kiss, and Frank Lindseth. A multi-task vision transformer for segmentation and monocular depth estimation for autonomous vehicles. IEEE Open Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2023

    work page 2023

  6. [6]

    Persformer: 3d lane detection via perspective transformer and the openlane benchmark

    Li Chen, Chonghao Sima, Yang Li, Zehan Zheng, Jiajie Xu, Xiangwei Geng, Hongyang Li, Conghui He, Jianping Shi, Yu Qiao, et al. Persformer: 3d lane detection via perspective transformer and the openlane benchmark. In European Conference on Computer Vision, pages 550--567. Springer, 2022

    2022

  7. [7]

    M4depth: Monocular depth estimation for autonomous vehicles in unseen environments

    Micha \"e l Fonder, Damien Ernst, and Marc Van Droogenbroeck. M4depth: Monocular depth estimation for autonomous vehicles in unseen environments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.09847, 2021

    arXiv 2021

  8. [8]

    3d-lanenet: end-to-end 3d multiple lane detection

    Noa Garnett, Rafi Cohen, Tomer Pe'er, Roee Lahav, and Dan Levi. 3d-lanenet: end-to-end 3d multiple lane detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 2921--2930, 2019

    work page 2019

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    Gen-lanenet: A generalized and scalable approach for 3d lane detection

    Yuliang Guo, Guang Chen, Peitao Zhao, Weide Zhang, Jinghao Miao, Jingao Wang, and Tae Eun Choe. Gen-lanenet: A generalized and scalable approach for 3d lane detection. In Computer Vision--ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23--28, 2020, Proceedings, Part ...

    2020

  2. [10]

    Self-supervised monocular depth estimation by direction-aware cumulative convolution network

    Wencheng Han, Junbo Yin, and Jianbing Shen. Self-supervised monocular depth estimation by direction-aware cumulative convolution network. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 8613--8623, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 770--778, 2016

    2016

  4. [12]

    Anchor3dlane: Learning to regress 3d anchors for monocular 3d lane detection

    Shaofei Huang, Zhenwei Shen, Zehao Huang, Zi-han Ding, Jiao Dai, Jizhong Han, Naiyan Wang, and Si Liu. Anchor3dlane: Learning to regress 3d anchors for monocular 3d lane detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1745...

    2023

  5. [13]

    Eigenlanes: Data-driven lane descriptors for structurally diverse lanes, 2022

    Dongkwon Jin, Wonhui Park, Seong-Gyun Jeong, Heeyeon Kwon, and Chang-Su Kim. Eigenlanes: Data-driven lane descriptors for structurally diverse lanes, 2022

    2022

  6. [14]

    D-3dld: Depth-aware voxel space mapping for monocular 3d lane detection with uncertainty

    Nayeon Kim, Moonsub Byeon, Daehyun Ji, and Dokwan Oh. D-3dld: Depth-aware voxel space mapping for monocular 3d lane detection with uncertainty. In ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP), pages 1--5. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  7. [15]

    Key points estimation and point instance segmentation approach for lane detection

    Yeongmin Ko, Younkwan Lee, Shoaib Azam, Farzeen Munir, Moongu Jeon, and Witold Pedrycz. Key points estimation and point instance segmentation approach for lane detection. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 23 0 (7): 0 8949--8958, 2021

    2021

  8. [16]

    Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data

    John Lafferty, Andrew McCallum, Fernando Pereira, et al. Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In Icml, page 3. Williamstown, MA, 2001

    2001

  9. [17]

    Reconstruct from top view: A 3d lane detection approach based on geometry structure prior

    Chenguang Li, Jia Shi, Ya Wang, and Guangliang Cheng. Reconstruct from top view: A 3d lane detection approach based on geometry structure prior. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) Workshops, pages 4370--4379, 2022 a

    2022

  10. [18]

    Reconstruct from top view: A 3d lane detection approach based on geometry structure prior

    Chenguang Li, Jia Shi, Ya Wang, and Guangliang Cheng. Reconstruct from top view: A 3d lane detection approach based on geometry structure prior. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 4370--4379, 2022 b

    2022

  11. [19]

    Line-cnn: End-to-end traffic line detection with line proposal unit

    Xiang Li, Jun Li, Xiaolin Hu, and Jian Yang. Line-cnn: End-to-end traffic line detection with line proposal unit. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 21 0 (1): 0 248--258, 2019

    2019

  12. [20]

    Grouplane: End-to-end 3d lane detection with channel-wise grouping

    Zhuoling Li, Chunrui Han, Zheng Ge, Jinrong Yang, En Yu, Haoqian Wang, Xiangyu Zhang, and Hengshuang Zhao. Grouplane: End-to-end 3d lane detection with channel-wise grouping. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    End-to-end lane shape prediction with transformers

    Ruijin Liu, Zejian Yuan, Tie Liu, and Zhiliang Xiong. End-to-end lane shape prediction with transformers. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, pages 3694--3702, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Learning to predict 3d lane shape and camera pose from a single image via geometry constraints

    Ruijin Liu, Dapeng Chen, Tie Liu, Zhiliang Xiong, and Zejian Yuan. Learning to predict 3d lane shape and camera pose from a single image via geometry constraints. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 1765--1772, 2022

    2022

  15. [23]

    Latr: 3d lane detection from monocular images with transformer

    Yueru Luo, Chaoda Zheng, Xu Yan, Tang Kun, Chao Zheng, Shuguang Cui, and Zhen Li. Latr: 3d lane detection from monocular images with transformer. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 7941--7952, 2023

    2023

  16. [24]

    Monocular 3D lane detection for Autonomous Driving : Recent Achievements , Challenges , and Outlooks

    Fulong Ma, Weiqing Qi, Guoyang Zhao, Linwei Zheng, Sheng Wang, Yuxuan Liu, and Ming Liu. Monocular 3D lane detection for Autonomous Driving : Recent Achievements , Challenges , and Outlooks

  17. [25]

    Heightlane: Bev heightmap guided 3d lane detection

    Chaesong Park, Eunbin Seo, and Jongwoo Lim. Heightlane: Bev heightmap guided 3d lane detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.08270, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Focus on local: Detecting lane marker from bottom up via key point

    Zhan Qu, Huan Jin, Yang Zhou, Zhen Yang, and Wei Zhang. Focus on local: Detecting lane marker from bottom up via key point. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 14122--14130, 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation

    Olaf Ronneberger, Philipp Fischer, and Thomas Brox. U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation. In Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention--MICCAI 2015: 18th international conference, Munich, Germany, October 5-9, 2015, proceedings, part...

    2015

  20. [28]

    Scalability in perception for autonomous driving: Waymo open dataset

    Pei Sun, Henrik Kretzschmar, Xerxes Dotiwalla, Aurelien Chouard, Vijaysai Patnaik, Paul Tsui, James Guo, Yin Zhou, Yuning Chai, Benjamin Caine, et al. Scalability in perception for autonomous driving: Waymo open dataset. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vi...

    2020

  21. [29]

    Keep your eyes on the lane: Real-time attention-guided lane detection

    Lucas Tabelini, Rodrigo Berriel, Thiago M Paixao, Claudine Badue, Alberto F De Souza, and Thiago Oliveira-Santos. Keep your eyes on the lane: Real-time attention-guided lane detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages ...

    2021

  22. [30]

    Polylanenet: Lane estimation via deep polynomial regression

    Lucas Tabelini, Rodrigo Berriel, Thiago M Paixao, Claudine Badue, Alberto F De Souza, and Thiago Oliveira-Santos. Polylanenet: Lane estimation via deep polynomial regression. In 2020 25th International Conference on Pattern Recognition (ICPR), pages 6150--6156. IEEE, 2021 b

    2020

  23. [31]

    End-to-end lane detection through differentiable least-squares fitting

    Wouter Van Gansbeke, Bert De Brabandere, Davy Neven, Marc Proesmans, and Luc Van Gool. End-to-end lane detection through differentiable least-squares fitting. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision Workshops, pages 0--0, 2019

    2019

  24. [32]

    A keypoint-based global association network for lane detection

    Jinsheng Wang, Yinchao Ma, Shaofei Huang, Tianrui Hui, Fei Wang, Chen Qian, and Tianzhu Zhang. A keypoint-based global association network for lane detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1392--1401, 2022 a

    2022

  25. [33]

    A keypoint-based global association network for lane detection, 2022 b

    Jinsheng Wang, Yinchao Ma, Shaofei Huang, Tianrui Hui, Fei Wang, Chen Qian, and Tianzhu Zhang. A keypoint-based global association network for lane detection, 2022 b

    2022

  26. [34]

    Bev-lanedet: An efficient 3d lane detection based on virtual camera via key-points

    Ruihao Wang, Jian Qin, Kaiying Li, Yaochen Li, Dong Cao, and Jintao Xu. Bev-lanedet: An efficient 3d lane detection based on virtual camera via key-points. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1002--1011, 2023

    2023

  27. [35]

    Depth anything: Unleashing the power of large-scale unlabeled data

    Lihe Yang, Bingyi Kang, Zilong Huang, Xiaogang Xu, Jiashi Feng, and Hengshuang Zhao. Depth anything: Unleashing the power of large-scale unlabeled data. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 10371--10381, 2024 a

    2024

  28. [36]

    Depth anything v2

    Lihe Yang, Bingyi Kang, Zilong Huang, Zhen Zhao, Xiaogang Xu, Jiashi Feng, and Hengshuang Zhao. Depth anything v2. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09414, 2024 b

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Clrnet: Cross layer refinement network for lane detection

    Tu Zheng, Yifei Huang, Yang Liu, Wenjian Tang, Zheng Yang, Deng Cai, and Xiaofei He. Clrnet: Cross layer refinement network for lane detection. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 898--907, 2022

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.