Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 76 references

S2GO: Streaming Sparse Gaussian Occupancy Prediction

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read S2GO compresses a driving scene into roughly a thousand sparse 3D queries, streams them across time, and decodes them into semantic Gaussians, achieving state-of-the-art occupancy accuracy on nuScenes and KITTI while running about six…

desk verdict A solid, genuinely new streaming query-based occupancy method with strong ablations; the headline SOTA margin depends on an unverified baseline re-evaluation that needs checking before trust. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.05473 v1 pith:D3AMSB74 submitted 2025-06-05 cs.CV

Jinhyung Park , Yihan Hu , Chensheng Peng , Wenzhao Zheng , Kris Kitani , Wei Zhan This is my paper
classification cs.CV
keywords 3DoccupancypredictionsparsequeriessemanticGaussiansstreamingperceptiondenoisingpretrainingGaussian-to-voxelsplattingautonomousdrivingtemporalquerypropagation
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 show that 3D semantic occupancy prediction for autonomous driving does not need a dense voxel grid or tens of thousands of Gaussians. Its method, S2GO, keeps a compact set of roughly 900 to 1800 sparse 3D queries, refines them against a queue of past queries and current RGB images, and decodes each query into a small cluster of finer semantic Gaussians that are splatted to voxels. A separate LiDAR-supervised denoising pretraining stage teaches the sparse queries to move from empty space onto occupied geometry, and this prior transfers to a second stage in which queries start from learned random positions and only RGB images are used. Across SurroundOcc, Occ3D, and SSCBench-KITTI-360, the paper reports state-of-the-art IoU and mIoU, including a 1.5 IoU gain over GaussianWorld with roughly 5.9x faster inference.

What carries the argument

The central object is the propagating sparse query, a 3D anchor with a predicted offset, opacity, velocity, and $J$ finer Gaussians per query (Eq. 6). A temporal transformer refines the current query set against a queue of past queries and current image features, following the streaming query design of detection models. The load-bearing mechanism is the denoising pretraining objective (Eq. 8), whose first term pulls each query back toward its sampled LiDAR surface point while depth and RGB rendering losses shape the per-query Gaussians; this is what teaches the otherwise ambiguous query-to-scene assignment. In Stage 2, opacity-weighted occupancy (Eq. 9), an optimized Gaussian-to-voxel splatting kernel, and $\delta$-separated top-opacity query propagation make the streaming loop accurate and fast.

What would settle it

Run the Occ3D or SurroundOcc evaluation with query propagation disabled for the same number of training epochs; the paper's Table 6 reports a 2.6 mIoU gap between the no-propagation baseline (17.92) and $\delta$-distributed propagation (20.51), so a replication that closes this gap would show the streaming mechanism is not essential to the claimed gains.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that a small set of propagating 3D queries, each anchoring a group of finer semantic Gaussians, can carry the full occupancy of a driving scene across time. Query locations are initialized at Furthest-Point-Sampled LiDAR points plus uniform noise in Stage 1, and the network is trained to denoise these queries back onto surface geometry while rendering their Gaussians into depth maps, RGB images, and neighboring keyframes (Eq. 8). In Stage 2 the LiDAR initialization is removed, queries start from learnable 3D locations, and only image features drive refinement, yet the pretrained query-motion prior lets them reposition onto occupied regions and decode into voxel-level semantic occupancy. The paper further folds opacity into the occupancy probability (Eq. 9), so background Gaussians can signal emptiness by lowering opacity, and selects propagated queries by separated top opacity to preserve both high-occupancy tracking and scene coverage. The result is state-of-the-art numbers on all three benchmarks at real-time speeds.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the query-motion behavior learned under LiDAR-supervised denoising pretraining transfers to Stage 2, where queries start from random learned positions and only RGB images are available.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • RGB-only occupancy prediction becomes real-time: 20.8 FPS for S2GO-Small and 14.5 FPS for S2GO-Base on an A100, and 26 FPS on a single 4090 for the small model.
  • Because the query set has fixed size regardless of history, streaming dozens of past frames adds no extra compute; the paper shows mIoU and IoU keep rising with history length.
  • A single per-query velocity prediction lets the same network roll future occupancy forward, so motion estimation and occupancy share one representation.
  • The rendering-based pretraining does not require semantic labels, so large unlabeled RGB-LiDAR collections could be used to scale the geometry prior to new scenes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension: the two-stage recipe could be applied to other dense prediction tasks with sparse-to-dense ambiguity, such as semantic scene completion, because the denoising objective is task-agnostic geometry learning.
  • The zero-shot monocular depth substitution in Table 10 suggests the pretraining could be made fully camera-only with better depth estimators, removing the LiDAR requirement entirely.
  • The $\delta$-spaced query selection is a hand-set heuristic; a learned or attention-based selection could replace it and might scale better to cluttered scenes.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes S2GO, a streaming sparse-query framework for 3D semantic occupancy prediction. Instead of voxel grids or tens of thousands of Gaussians, S2GO maintains a compact queue of roughly 900–1800 3D queries, refines them with current camera features and past queries, and decodes each query into a small set of semantic Gaussians. The method uses a two-stage training scheme: Stage 1 pre-trains the query-to-Gaussian pipeline with a LiDAR-supervised denoising and rendering objective, and Stage 2 trains the semantic occupancy prediction with Gaussian-to-voxel splatting. Additional contributions include an opacity-weighted occupancy probability, an optimized Gaussian-to-voxel CUDA kernel, and distance-based query propagation. Experiments on SurroundOcc-nuScenes, Occ3D-nuScenes, and SSCBench-KITTI-360 report state-of-the-art IoU/mIoU with substantially higher FPS than prior Gaussian-based methods.

Significance. If the reported numbers are reproducible, this is a significant result: it demonstrates that dense occupancy prediction can be achieved with a highly compact query-based representation, and the efficiency gains are large (e.g., 26.1 FPS on a single 4090 for S2GO-Small in Table 1). The paper also provides useful engineering contributions, such as the 20.4x backward-pass speedup for Gaussian-to-voxel splatting reported in Section 3.4.3, and the ablations in Tables 4–8 and Table 10 give a reasonable picture of which components matter. Table 10 is particularly valuable because it shows that LiDAR is not strictly required for the denoising pre-training, partially addressing a natural concern about the method's dependence on LiDAR supervision. However, the headline SOTA claim rests on an unverified re-evaluation of the GaussianWorld baseline, and no code, checkpoints, evaluation logs, or error bars are provided. Those omissions currently limit the independent credibility of the benchmark claims.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.1, Table 1] The central claim of a 1.5 IoU improvement over GaussianWorld depends entirely on the re-evaluated GaussianWorld* number of 32.77 IoU, which is not the number reported in the original GaussianWorld paper. The footnote states that the original paper over-weighted intermediate frames and that the authors re-evaluated released checkpoints under the standard setting, but no evaluation protocol, code, logs, or checkpoint identifiers are provided. Since the headline margin and the SOTA claim rest on this number, the authors should release the exact evaluation script, specify the metric implementation and frame-selection protocol, and provide the re-evaluated per-class results. Without this, the 1.5 IoU margin and the 5.9x speed advantage over GaussianWorld are not independently verifiable.
  2. [Section 4.3, Tables 4–8 and 10] All reported numbers appear to come from single runs, with no error bars or seed variance. Several ablation comparisons that are used to justify design choices are small: for example, Table 4 shows 20.25 vs. 20.55 mIoU between rows (e) and (d), Table 6 shows 20.51 vs. 19.94 between the two propagation strategies, and Table 10 shows 20.99 vs. 21.60 between LiDAR and Metric3D query initialization. These differences could easily be within run-to-run noise. The authors should report at least three seeds with standard deviations for the main results and for the key ablations, or otherwise demonstrate that the differences are statistically meaningful.
  3. [Section 3.1, Eq. (9)] The opacity-weighted formulation in Eq. (9) changes the meaning of alpha(x; G_i) from a per-Gaussian occupancy probability to an opacity-scaled Gaussian density. The paper should clarify the constraints on the predicted opacity (must it be in [0,1]?) and justify that the product form in Eq. (1) still represents a valid 'probability that x is occupied by at least one Gaussian' under this new definition. Table 5 shows that this modification is a major contributor (+3.16 mIoU), so a formal derivation or at least a clear probabilistic interpretation is needed to support the claim that this preserves the mixture semantics of GaussianFormer-2 while improving geometry.
  4. [Section 3.3 and Table 4] The paper's motivation for the denoising pre-training is that it teaches queries to move from noised LiDAR points toward occupied geometry, and that this transfers to Stage 2 where queries are randomly initialized. However, Table 4 does not include the direct ablation 'learnable initialization + denoising objective'; Table 10 replaces LiDAR with zero-shot RGB depth during pre-training, but the Stage 2 query initialization remains random/learnable in both cases. To support the transfer claim, the authors should provide either an ablation with learnable initialization plus the denoising loss, or an analysis showing that after refinement the query distributions from random initialization and from noised-LiDAR initialization converge to similar configurations.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 2] The header 'V oxformer' should be 'VoxFormer'.
  2. [Eq. (7)] The notation {p^i}_{i=0}^K should be {p^i}_{i=1}^K, since K queries are indexed from 1 to K.
  3. [Table 7 caption] The phrase 'is enable to capture' should be 'is able to capture'.
  4. [Tables 1 and 3] FPS is measured on a 4090 in Table 1 but on an A100 in Table 3; the GPU should be stated consistently in each table caption and, preferably, the same GPU should be used for all speed comparisons.
  5. [Section 3.4.3] The description of the backward-pass kernel says threads are tied to individual Gaussians to avoid atomic operations on gradients, citing reference [37]; the connection to Taming 3DGS should be made more explicit, since the cited work addresses a different but related problem.
  6. [Section 5 / Abstract] The abstract and conclusion state '5.9x faster inference' than prior art, but Table 1 shows 5x for S2GO-Small and 3x for S2GO-Base relative to GaussianWorld; the speed-up claim should be tied to a specific configuration and baseline.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: S2GO's claims are empirical benchmark results assembled from standard published components, and the re-evaluated GaussianWorld baseline is an evaluation-validity risk, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

S2GO is an empirical systems paper; its state-of-the-art claims are benchmark measurements, not logical derivations from fitted inputs. The occupancy head is explicitly inherited from GaussianFormer-2 through Eqs. (1)-(5), but that is a standard published building block, and the paper modifies it (Eq. 9, efficient splatting) rather than deriving the target result from it. The denoising pretraining (Eqs. 7-8) supervises query positions with LiDAR samples, while Stage 2 is trained against ground-truth occupancy and the pretraining contribution is ablated in Table 4, so the transfer from pretraining to inference is an empirical assumption, not a definitional equivalence. The re-evaluated GaussianWorld baseline in Table 1 is flagged in the footnote as a re-evaluation of released checkpoints without full protocol details; this is a legitimate evaluation-validity concern, but re-evaluating a released checkpoint is not a circular reduction because the number is not constructed from S2GO's outputs nor fit to S2GO's objective. No load-bearing self-citation chain, imported uniqueness theorem, or ansatz-smuggling via citation appears. The overlapping authorship on GaussianFormer-2 and GaussianWorld is notable but does not force or define the reported outcomes. Therefore, no circularity is present.

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

The central claim is an empirical system result. It rests on several domain assumptions (Gaussian splatting occupancy, rendering-as-geometry, pretraining transfer) and a set of hand-chosen hyperparameters. No new physical entities are introduced. The pretraining transfer is the least externally supported assumption.

free parameters (6)
  • Number of queries K = 900 (S2GO-Small), 1800 (S2GO-Base)
    Chosen by hand as a trade-off between accuracy and inference speed; ablated in Table 7.
  • Number of Gaussians per query J = 10 (Small), 20 (Base)
    Chosen by hand; increasing J improves accuracy at higher compute cost (Table 7).
  • LiDAR noise epsilon for denoising pretraining = 1 meter (SurroundOcc); scaled for other datasets
    Hyperparameter in Eq. 7 for query initialization; no sensitivity analysis is provided.
  • Query propagation minimum distance delta = 1.6 m at inference; sampled 0-3 m during training
    Hyperparameter for top-opacity query selection with distance penalty (Sec 3.4.4); ablated in Table 6.
  • Denoising/rendering loss weights lambda_1, lambda_2, lambda_3 = Not reported
    Weights in Eq. 8; values are not given in the paper, so the balance is unverifiable.
  • History queue length = 4 frames (2s) default
    Temporal context length; Figure 5 shows longer history helps, but the default is fixed at 4 frames.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Gaussian-to-voxel splatting mixture model (Eqs. 1-5) from GaussianFormer/GaussianFormer-2 is a valid occupancy representation.
    Adopted without re-derivation from prior work [15,16]; the paper only modifies the opacity weighting (Eq. 9).
  • ad hoc to paper Denoising pretraining on LiDAR points transfers to RGB-only inference with randomly initialized queries.
    Core to S2GO; supported only by ablation (Table 4), with no theoretical guarantee or evidence outside the two-stage setup.
  • domain assumption Rendering depth and RGB from decoded Gaussians is a valid proxy for 3D geometry during pretraining.
    Assumes photometric and depth consistency with LiDAR projections trains useful geometry; standard in Gaussian splatting literature.
  • standard math Furthest-Point-Sampling gives an even coverage of LiDAR points suitable for query initialization.
    Standard sampling algorithm; uniformity is assumed helpful for coverage.
  • ad hoc to paper The opacity-weighted occupancy probability (Eq. 9) preserves the mixture semantics of GaussianFormer-2 while improving geometry.
    A design change motivated by observed background Gaussian behavior; validated only by ablation (Table 5).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of S2GO: Streaming Sparse Gaussian Occupancy Prediction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/D3AMSB74

@misc{pith2026250605473,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: S2GO: Streaming Sparse Gaussian Occupancy Prediction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/D3AMSB74}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.05473}
}
read the original abstract

Despite the demonstrated efficiency and performance of sparse query-based representations for perception, state-of-the-art 3D occupancy prediction methods still rely on voxel-based or dense Gaussian-based 3D representations. However, dense representations are slow, and they lack flexibility in capturing the temporal dynamics of driving scenes. Distinct from prior work, we instead summarize the scene into a compact set of 3D queries which are propagated through time in an online, streaming fashion. These queries are then decoded into semantic Gaussians at each timestep. We couple our framework with a denoising rendering objective to guide the queries and their constituent Gaussians in effectively capturing scene geometry. Owing to its efficient, query-based representation, S2GO achieves state-of-the-art performance on the nuScenes and KITTI occupancy benchmarks, outperforming prior art (e.g., GaussianWorld) by 1.5 IoU with 5.9x faster inference.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.05473 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overall framework of S2GO for streaming perception. At each timestep, our method refines new 3D queries using current image observations and a queue of past queries. These queries are decoded into a set of fine-grained Gaussians, and a portion of the queries are propagated to future timesteps in a streaming fashion. In Stage 1, this query refinement and Gaussian prediction pipeline is pre-trained to effectively mode… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Qualitative comparison of occupancy prediction. We compare S2GO with GaussianWorld [68] by visualizing two timesteps from two distinct driving sequences. GaussianWorld struggles to maintain separate object representations over time, while S2GO effec￾tively preserves distinct object identities by operating at a higher semantic level with sparse queries. sentations. Consequently, due to its weaker sense of object￾ness… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visualization of future occupancy predictions. We use the self-supervised velocity prediction for each query to roll out future occupancy predictions. Our streaming query-based frame￾work well-decouples motion of individual objects. and 10 Gaussians per query is enable…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Impact of history length on occupancy performance. A longer history consistently improves performance, showcasing the advantage of our streaming approach over prior projection-based methods. Method Backbone Mask Input Size Epoch RayIoU RayIoU1m, 2m, 4m mIoU FPS BEVForm…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Qualitative Results on the SSCBench-KITTI-360 dataset. S2GO well-captures occupancy details even in a monocular setting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    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. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 11621–11631, 2020. 6, 1

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Monoscene: Monoc- ular 3d semantic scene completion

    Anh-Quan Cao and Raoul De Charette. Monoscene: Monoc- ular 3d semantic scene completion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 3991–4001, 2022. 2, 6, 1

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Monoscene: Monoc- ular 3d semantic scene completion

    Anh-Quan Cao and Raoul de Charette. Monoscene: Monoc- ular 3d semantic scene completion. InCVPR, pages 3991– 4001, 2022. 1

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    End-to- end object detection with transformers

    Nicolas Carion, Francisco Massa, Gabriel Synnaeve, Nicolas Usunier, Alexander Kirillov, and Sergey Zagoruyko. End-to- end object detection with transformers. InEuropean confer- ence on computer vision, pages 213–229. Springer, 2020. 1, 2, 3

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    pixelsplat: 3d gaussian splats from image pairs for scalable generalizable 3d reconstruction

    David Charatan, Sizhe Lester Li, Andrea Tagliasacchi, and Vincent Sitzmann. pixelsplat: 3d gaussian splats from image pairs for scalable generalizable 3d reconstruction. InPro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 19457–19467, 2024. 4

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Maptracker: Tracking with strided memory fusion for consistent vector hd mapping

    Jiacheng Chen, Yuefan Wu, Jiaqi Tan, Hang Ma, and Yasu- taka Furukawa. Maptracker: Tracking with strided memory fusion for consistent vector hd mapping. InEuropean Con- ference on Computer Vision, pages 90–107. Springer, 2024. 1, 2

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Flashattention: Fast and memory- efficient exact attention with io-awareness.arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.14135, 2022

    Tri Dao, Daniel Y Fu, Stefano Ermon, Atri Rudra, and Christopher R ´e. Flashattention: Fast and memory- efficient exact attention with io-awareness.arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.14135, 2022. 1

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    A comprehensive framework for 3d occupancy estimation in autonomous driving.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehi- cles, 2024

    Wanshui Gan, Ningkai Mo, Hongbin Xu, and Naoto Yokoya. A comprehensive framework for 3d occupancy estimation in autonomous driving.IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehi- cles, 2024. 6, 2

    work page 2024

Show all 76 references
  1. [9]

    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. In2012 IEEE conference on computer vision and pat- tern recognition, pages 3354–3361. IEEE, 2012. 6, 1

    2012

  2. [10]

    Deep residual learning for image recognition

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. Deep residual learning for image recognition. InProceed- ings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 770–778, 2016. 5

    2016

  3. [11]

    Bevdet4d: Exploit tempo- ral cues in multi-camera 3d object detection.arXiv preprint arXiv:/2203.17054, 2021

    Junjie Huang and Guan Huang. Bevdet4d: Exploit tempo- ral cues in multi-camera 3d object detection.arXiv preprint arXiv:/2203.17054, 2021. 6, 2

    2021 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Bevdet4d: Exploit temporal cues in multi-camera 3d object detection, 2022

    Junjie Huang and Guan Huang. Bevdet4d: Exploit temporal cues in multi-camera 3d object detection, 2022. 1

    2022

  5. [13]

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

    Yuanhui Huang, Wenzhao Zheng, Yunpeng Zhang, Jie Zhou, and Jiwen Lu. Tri-perspective view for vision- based 3d semantic occupancy prediction. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 9223–9232, 2023. 2, 6

    2023

  6. [14]

    Tri-perspective view for vision-based 3d se- mantic occupancy prediction

    Yuanhui Huang, Wenzhao Zheng, Yunpeng Zhang, Jie Zhou, and Jiwen Lu. Tri-perspective view for vision-based 3d se- mantic occupancy prediction. InCVPR, pages 9223–9232,

  7. [15]

    Prob- abilistic gaussian superposition for efficient 3d occupancy prediction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.04384, 2024

    Yuanhui Huang, Amonnut Thammatadatrakoon, Wenzhao Zheng, Yunpeng Zhang, Dalong Du, and Jiwen Lu. Prob- abilistic gaussian superposition for efficient 3d occupancy prediction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.04384, 2024. 1, 2, 3, 6

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Gaussianformer: Scene as gaussians for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction, 2024

    Yuanhui Huang, Wenzhao Zheng, Yunpeng Zhang, Jie Zhou, and Jiwen Lu. Gaussianformer: Scene as gaussians for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction, 2024. 1, 2, 3, 5

    2024

  9. [17]

    Gaussianformer: Scene as gaussians for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction

    Yuanhui Huang, Wenzhao Zheng, Yunpeng Zhang, Jie Zhou, and Jiwen Lu. Gaussianformer: Scene as gaussians for vision-based 3d semantic occupancy prediction. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 376–393. Springer,

  10. [18]

    3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.ACM Trans

    Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimk ¨uhler, and George Drettakis. 3d gaussian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.ACM Trans. Graph., 42(4):139–1,

  11. [19]

    Hdmapnet: A local semantic map learning and evaluation framework

    Qi Li, Yue Wang, Yilun Wang, and Hang Zhao. Hdmapnet: A local semantic map learning and evaluation framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.06307, 2021. 1

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Bevdepth: Acquisition of reliable depth for multi-view 3d object detec- tion, 2022

    Yinhao Li, Zheng Ge, Guanyi Yu, Jinrong Yang, Zengran Wang, Yukang Shi, Jianjian Sun, and Zeming Li. Bevdepth: Acquisition of reliable depth for multi-view 3d object detec- tion, 2022. 1

    2022

  13. [21]

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

    Yiming Li, Zhiding Yu, Christopher Choy, Chaowei Xiao, Jose M Alvarez, Sanja Fidler, Chen Feng, and Anima Anand- kumar. V oxformer: Sparse voxel transformer for camera- based 3d semantic scene completion. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern ...

    2023

  14. [22]

    Alvarez, Sanja Fidler, Chen Feng, and Anima Anandkumar

    Yiming Li, Zhiding Yu, Christopher Choy, Chaowei Xiao, Jose M. Alvarez, Sanja Fidler, Chen Feng, and Anima Anandkumar. V oxformer: Sparse voxel transformer for camera-based 3d semantic scene completion. InCVPR, pages 9087–9098, 2023. 2

    2023

  15. [23]

    Sscbench: A large-scale 3d semantic scene comple- tion benchmark for autonomous driving

    Yiming Li, Sihang Li, Xinhao Liu, Moonjun Gong, Kenan Li, Nuo Chen, Zijun Wang, Zhiheng Li, Tao Jiang, Fisher Yu, et al. Sscbench: A large-scale 3d semantic scene comple- tion benchmark for autonomous driving. In2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and ...

    2024

  16. [24]

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

    Zhiqi Li, Wenhai Wang, Hongyang Li, Enze Xie, Chong- hao Sima, Tong Lu, Yu Qiao, and Jifeng Dai. Bevformer: Learning bird’s-eye-view representation from multi-camera images via spatiotemporal transformers. InEuropean con- ference on computer vision, pages 1–18. Springer, 2022. 1, 6, 2

    2022

  17. [25]

    Bevformer: Learning bird’s-eye-view representation from multi-camera images via spatiotemporal transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.17270, 2022

    Zhiqi Li, Wenhai Wang, Hongyang Li, Enze Xie, Chong- hao Sima, Tong Lu, Qiao Yu, and Jifeng Dai. Bevformer: Learning bird’s-eye-view representation from multi-camera images via spatiotemporal transformers.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.17270, 2022. 6

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Zhiqi Li, Zhiding Yu, David Austin, Mingsheng Fang, Shiyi Lan, Jan Kautz, and Jose M. Alvarez. Fb-occ: 3d occupancy prediction based on forward-backward view transformation,

  19. [27]

    Fb-occ: 3d occupancy prediction based on forward-backward view transformation

    Zhiqi Li, Zhiding Yu, David Austin, Mingsheng Fang, Shiyi Lan, Jan Kautz, and Jose M Alvarez. Fb-occ: 3d occupancy prediction based on forward-backward view transformation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.01492, 2023. 2, 6

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Maptr: Structured modeling and learning for online vectorized hd map construction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.14437, 2022

    Bencheng Liao, Shaoyu Chen, Xinggang Wang, Tianheng Cheng, Qian Zhang, Wenyu Liu, and Chang Huang. Maptr: Structured modeling and learning for online vectorized hd map construction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.14437, 2022. 1, 2

    2022 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Maptrv2: An end-to-end framework for online vectorized hd map construction.International Journal of Computer Vision, pages 1–23, 2024

    Bencheng Liao, Shaoyu Chen, Yunchi Zhang, Bo Jiang, Qian Zhang, Wenyu Liu, Chang Huang, and Xinggang Wang. Maptrv2: An end-to-end framework for online vectorized hd map construction.International Journal of Computer Vision, pages 1–23, 2024. 1, 2

    2024

  22. [30]

    Kitti-360: A novel dataset and benchmarks for urban scene understanding in 2d and 3d.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(3):3292–3310, 2022

    Yiyi Liao, Jun Xie, and Andreas Geiger. Kitti-360: A novel dataset and benchmarks for urban scene understanding in 2d and 3d.IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 45(3):3292–3310, 2022. 2, 1

    2022

  23. [31]

    Sparse4d: Multi-view 3d object detection with sparse spatial-temporal fusion, 2022

    Xuewu Lin, Tianwei Lin, Zixiang Pei, Lichao Huang, and Zhizhong Su. Sparse4d: Multi-view 3d object detection with sparse spatial-temporal fusion, 2022. 3, 1

    2022

  24. [32]

    Sparse4d v3: Advancing end-to-end 3d detec- tion and tracking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.11722, 2023

    Xuewu Lin, Zixiang Pei, Tianwei Lin, Lichao Huang, and Zhizhong Su. Sparse4d v3: Advancing end-to-end 3d detec- tion and tracking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.11722, 2023. 2

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Sparsebev: High-performance sparse 3d object de- tection from multi-camera videos

    Haisong Liu, Yao Teng, Tao Lu, Haiguang Wang, and Limin Wang. Sparsebev: High-performance sparse 3d object de- tection from multi-camera videos. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, pages 18580–18590, 2023. 1

    2023

  26. [34]

    Fully sparse 3d occupancy prediction

    Haisong Liu, Yang Chen, Haiguang Wang, Zetong Yang, Tianyu Li, Jia Zeng, Li Chen, Hongyang Li, and Limin Wang. Fully sparse 3d occupancy prediction. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 54–71. Springer,

  27. [35]

    Petr: Position embedding transformation for multi-view 3d object detection

    Yingfei Liu, Tiancai Wang, Xiangyu Zhang, and Jian Sun. Petr: Position embedding transformation for multi-view 3d object detection. InComputer Vision–ECCV 2022: 17th Eu- ropean Conference, Tel Aviv, Israel, October 23–27, 2022, Proceedings, Part XXVII, pages 531–548. Springer, 2022. 1

    2022

  28. [36]

    Detr4d: Direct multi-view 3d object detection with sparse attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.07849, 2022

    Zhipeng Luo, Changqing Zhou, Gongjie Zhang, and Shi- jian Lu. Detr4d: Direct multi-view 3d object detection with sparse attention.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.07849, 2022. 2

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Taming 3dgs: High-quality radiance fields with limited resources

    Saswat Subhajyoti Mallick, Rahul Goel, Bernhard Kerbl, Markus Steinberger, Francisco Vicente Carrasco, and Fer- nando De La Torre. Taming 3dgs: High-quality radiance fields with limited resources. InSIGGRAPH Asia 2024 Con- ference Papers, pages 1–11, 2024. 5

    2024

  30. [38]

    Mobileye under the hood.https://www

    Mobileye. Mobileye under the hood.https://www. mobileye.com/ces-2024/, 2024. 1

    2024

  31. [39]

    Atlas: End- to-end 3d scene reconstruction from posed images

    Zak Murez, Tarrence Van As, James Bartolozzi, Ayan Sinha, Vijay Badrinarayanan, and Andrew Rabinovich. Atlas: End- to-end 3d scene reconstruction from posed images. In European conference on computer vision, pages 414–431. Springer, 2020. 6, 1

    2020

  32. [40]

    Renderocc: Vision-centric 3d occupancy pre- diction with 2d rendering supervision

    Mingjie Pan, Jiaming Liu, Renrui Zhang, Peixiang Huang, Xiaoqi Li, Hongwei Xie, Bing Wang, Li Liu, and Shang- hang Zhang. Renderocc: Vision-centric 3d occupancy pre- diction with 2d rendering supervision. In2024 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)...

    2024

  33. [41]

    Desire-gs: 4d street gaussians for static-dynamic decomposition and surface reconstruction for urban driving scenes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.11921,

    Chensheng Peng, Chengwei Zhang, Yixiao Wang, Chenfeng Xu, Yichen Xie, Wenzhao Zheng, Kurt Keutzer, Masayoshi Tomizuka, and Wei Zhan. Desire-gs: 4d street gaussians for static-dynamic decomposition and surface reconstruction for urban driving scenes.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.11921,

    arXiv

  34. [42]

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

    Jonah Philion and Sanja Fidler. Lift, splat, shoot: Encoding images from arbitrary camera rigs by implicitly unprojecting to 3d. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 194–210. Springer, 2020. 1

    2020

  35. [43]

    Lmscnet: Lightweight multiscale 3d semantic com- pletion

    Luis Roldao, Raoul De Charette, and Anne Verroust- Blondet. Lmscnet: Lightweight multiscale 3d semantic com- pletion. In2020 International Conference on 3D Vision (3DV), pages 111–119. IEEE, 2020. 6

    2020

  36. [44]

    Occupancy as set of points, 2024

    Yiang Shi, Tianheng Cheng, Qian Zhang, Wenyu Liu, and Xinggang Wang. Occupancy as set of points, 2024. 2

    2024

  37. [45]

    Semantic scene com- pletion from a single depth image

    Shuran Song, Fisher Yu, Andy Zeng, Angel X Chang, Mano- lis Savva, and Thomas Funkhouser. Semantic scene com- pletion from a single depth image. InProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recogni- tion, pages 1746–1754, 2017. 6

    2017

  38. [46]

    Tesla AI Day.https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=ODSJsviD_SU, 2022

    Tesla. Tesla AI Day.https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=ODSJsviD_SU, 2022. 1

    2022

  39. [47]

    Occ3d: A large-scale 3d occupancy prediction benchmark for autonomous driving.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:64318–64330, 2023

    Xiaoyu Tian, Tao Jiang, Longfei Yun, Yucheng Mao, Huitong Yang, Yue Wang, Yilun Wang, and Hang Zhao. Occ3d: A large-scale 3d occupancy prediction benchmark for autonomous driving.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:64318–64330, 2023. 2, 6, 1

    2023

  40. [48]

    Scene as occupancy

    Wenwen Tong, Chonghao Sima, Tai Wang, Li Chen, Silei Wu, Hanming Deng, Yi Gu, Lewei Lu, Ping Luo, Dahua Lin, et al. Scene as occupancy. InICCV, pages 8406–8415, 2023. 2

    2023

  41. [49]

    Exploring object-centric temporal modeling for efficient multi-view 3d object detection

    Shihao Wang, Yingfei Liu, Tiancai Wang, Ying Li, and Xi- angyu Zhang. Exploring object-centric temporal modeling for efficient multi-view 3d object detection. InICCV, pages 3621–3631, 2023. 1, 3

    2023

  42. [50]

    Exploring object-centric temporal modeling for efficient multi-view 3d object detection

    Shihao Wang, Yingfei Liu, Tiancai Wang, Ying Li, and Xi- angyu Zhang. Exploring object-centric temporal modeling for efficient multi-view 3d object detection. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 3621–3631, 2023. 2

    2023

  43. [51]

    Detr3d: 3d object detection from multi-view images via 3d-to-2d queries.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.06922, 2020

    Yue Wang, Vitor Guizilini, Tianyuan Zhang, Yilun Wang, Hang Zhao, and Justin Solomon. Detr3d: 3d object detection from multi-view images via 3d-to-2d queries.arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.06922, 2020. 1, 3

    2020 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Panoocc: Unified occupancy representation for camera-based 3d panoptic segmentation

    Yuqi Wang, Yuntao Chen, Xingyu Liao, Lue Fan, and Zhaox- iang Zhang. Panoocc: Unified occupancy representation for camera-based 3d panoptic segmentation. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 17158–17168, 2024. 2

    2024

  45. [53]

    End-to-End Autonomy: A New Era of Self-Driving

    Wayve. End-to-End Autonomy: A New Era of Self-Driving. http : / / wayve . ai / cvpr - e2ead - tutorial/,

  46. [54]

    Surroundocc: Multi-camera 3d occu- pancy prediction for autonomous driving

    Yi Wei, Linqing Zhao, Wenzhao Zheng, Zheng Zhu, Jie Zhou, and Jiwen Lu. Surroundocc: Multi-camera 3d occu- pancy prediction for autonomous driving. InICCV, pages 21729–21740, 2023. 6, 1

    2023

  47. [55]

    Surroundocc: Multi-camera 3d occu- pancy prediction for autonomous driving

    Yi Wei, Linqing Zhao, Wenzhao Zheng, Zheng Zhu, Jie Zhou, and Jiwen Lu. Surroundocc: Multi-camera 3d occu- pancy prediction for autonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion, pages 21729–21740, 2023. 2, 6

    2023

  48. [56]

    Gaussianpretrain: A simple uni- fied 3d gaussian representation for visual pre-training in au- tonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.12452, 2024

    Shaoqing Xu, Fang Li, Shengyin Jiang, Ziying Song, Li Liu, and Zhi-xin Yang. Gaussianpretrain: A simple uni- fied 3d gaussian representation for visual pre-training in au- tonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.12452, 2024. 2

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Unipad: A universal pre-training paradigm for autonomous driving

    Honghui Yang, Sha Zhang, Di Huang, Xiaoyang Wu, Haoyi Zhu, Tong He, Shixiang Tang, Hengshuang Zhao, Qibo Qiu, Binbin Lin, et al. Unipad: A universal pre-training paradigm for autonomous driving. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognitio...

    2024

  50. [58]

    Cvt-occ: Cost volume temporal fusion for 3d occupancy prediction

    Zhangchen Ye, Tao Jiang, Chenfeng Xu, Yiming Li, and Hang Zhao. Cvt-occ: Cost volume temporal fusion for 3d occupancy prediction. InEuropean Conference on Computer Vision, pages 381–397. Springer, 2024. 2

    2024

  51. [59]

    Center- based 3d object detection and tracking

    Tianwei Yin, Xingyi Zhou, and Philipp Krahenbuhl. Center- based 3d object detection and tracking. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 11784–11793, 2021. 1

    2021

  52. [60]

    Metric3d: Towards zero-shot metric 3d prediction from a single image

    Wei Yin, Chi Zhang, Hao Chen, Zhipeng Cai, Gang Yu, Kaixuan Wang, Xiaozhi Chen, and Chunhua Shen. Metric3d: Towards zero-shot metric 3d prediction from a single image. 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vi- sion (ICCV), pages 9009–9019, 2023. 2

    2023

  53. [61]

    Streammapnet: Streaming mapping network for vectorized online hd map construction

    Tianyuan Yuan, Yicheng Liu, Yue Wang, Yilun Wang, and Hang Zhao. Streammapnet: Streaming mapping network for vectorized online hd map construction. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, pages 7356–7365, 2024. 1, 2, 3

    2024

  54. [62]

    Occformer: Dual-path transformer for vision-based 3d semantic occu- pancy prediction

    Yunpeng Zhang, Zheng Zhu, and Dalong Du. Occformer: Dual-path transformer for vision-based 3d semantic occu- pancy prediction. InICCV, pages 9433–9443, 2023. 1

    2023

  55. [63]

    Occformer: Dual-path transformer for vision-based 3d semantic occu- pancy prediction

    Yunpeng Zhang, Zheng Zhu, and Dalong Du. Occformer: Dual-path transformer for vision-based 3d semantic occu- pancy prediction. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Inter- national Conference on Computer Vision, pages 9433–9443,

  56. [64]

    Vision-based 3d occupancy prediction in autonomous driving: a review and outlook.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02595, 2024

    Yanan Zhang, Jinqing Zhang, Zengran Wang, Junhao Xu, and Di Huang. Vision-based 3d occupancy prediction in autonomous driving: a review and outlook.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.02595, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

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

    Wenzhao Zheng, Weiliang Chen, Yuanhui Huang, Borui Zhang, Yueqi Duan, and Jiwen Lu. Occworld: Learning a 3d occupancy world model for autonomous driving. InEuro- pean conference on computer vision, pages 55–72. Springer,

  58. [66]

    Gaussianad: Gaussian-centric end-to- end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10371,

    Wenzhao Zheng, Junjie Wu, Yao Zheng, Sicheng Zuo, Zixun Xie, Longchao Yang, Yong Pan, Zhihui Hao, Peng Jia, Xi- anpeng Lang, et al. Gaussianad: Gaussian-centric end-to- end autonomous driving.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10371,

    arXiv

  59. [67]

    Deformable detr: Deformable trans- formers for end-to-end object detection.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.04159, 2020

    Xizhou Zhu, Weijie Su, Lewei Lu, Bin Li, Xiaogang Wang, and Jifeng Dai. Deformable detr: Deformable trans- formers for end-to-end object detection.arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.04159, 2020. 1

    2010 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Gaussianworld: Gaussian world model for streaming 3d occupancy prediction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10373, 2024

    Sicheng Zuo, Wenzhao Zheng, Yuanhui Huang, Jie Zhou, and Jiwen Lu. Gaussianworld: Gaussian world model for streaming 3d occupancy prediction.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10373, 2024. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 S2GO: Streaming Sparse Gaussian Occupancy Prediction Supplementary Material

    2024 arXiv

  61. [69]

    The nuScenes dataset[1] provides 1000 scenes of surround- view driving scenes

    Experiment setup Datasets.We conducted comprehensive experiments on three benchmarks derived from nuScenes and KITTI. The nuScenes dataset[1] provides 1000 scenes of surround- view driving scenes. We evaluate our method on both the SurroundOcc [54] and Occ3D [47] benchmarks. S...

  62. [70]

    S2GO- Small uses an ImageNet1k backbone, while S2GO-Base leverages nuImages pre-training

    Implementation details On nuScenes, S2GO uses a 256x704 resolution im- age and is pre-trained on denoising and rendering for 12 epochs without semantic annotations, and then trained for 24 epochs for 3D semantic occupancy prediction. S2GO- Small uses an ImageNet1k backbone, wh...

  63. [71]

    Number of History Frames To further evaluate S2GO, we plot occupancy perfor- mance over different streaming history lengths in Figure

  64. [72]

    We emphasize that unlike prior projection-based works, S2GO incursno additional costfrom a longer history

    With a longer history, performance steadily improves, demonstrating the efficacy of our streaming framework. We emphasize that unlike prior projection-based works, S2GO incursno additional costfrom a longer history. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 # of History Frames 19 20 21 22mIoU ...

  65. [73]

    The backbone, temporal transformer, gaussian pre- diction, and propagation take 11.54ms, 22.79ms, 2.22ms, and 1.45ms, respectively

    Latency Breakdown We benchmark our 9000 Gaussian model on an A100 GPU. The backbone, temporal transformer, gaussian pre- diction, and propagation take 11.54ms, 22.79ms, 2.22ms, and 1.45ms, respectively

  66. [74]

    We find that this largely maintains performance, indicating the general- ity of our pretraining pipeline

    Pre-training with Zero-shot Monocular Depth In Table 10 we ablate the use of LiDAR during pre- training by replacing it with zero-shot monocular depth pre- dictions from Metric3D [60] on RGB images. We find that this largely maintains performance, indicating the general- ity o...

  67. [75]

    Comprehensive Evaluation results We provide extensive comparisons with existing meth- ods on the Occ3D benchmark using detailed metrics, as shown in Tab. 9

  68. [76]

    6 we visualize example predictions and ground truth from the SSCBench-KITTI-360 dataset

    More Qualitative Results In Fig. 6 we visualize example predictions and ground truth from the SSCBench-KITTI-360 dataset. Our frame- work flexible adapts to a monocular setting and precisely predicts the semantic occupancy of the driving scene. Pred. OccupancyGround TruthPred....

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.