Next Article in Journal
YOLO-SAR: An Enhanced Multi-Scale Ship Detection Method in Low-Light Environments
Previous Article in Journal
Error Model for Autonomous Global Positioning Method Using Polarized Sky Light and True North Measurement Instrument
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

A Comparison of Segmentation Methods for Semantic OctoMap Generation

Institute of Robotics and Machine Intelligence, Poznan University of Technology, pl. Marii Sklodowskiej-Curie 5, 60-965 Poznan, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2025, 15(13), 7285; https://doi.org/10.3390/app15137285 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 3 June 2025 / Revised: 21 June 2025 / Accepted: 26 June 2025 / Published: 27 June 2025

Abstract

Semantic mapping plays a critical role in enabling autonomous vehicles to understand and navigate complex environments. Instead of computationally demanding 3D segmentation of point clouds, we propose efficient segmentation on RGB images and projection of the corresponding LIDAR measurements on the semantic OctoMap. This study presents a comparative evaluation of different semantic segmentation methods and examines the impact of input image resolution on the accuracy of 3D semantic environment reconstruction, inference time, and computational resource usage. The experiments were conducted using an ROS 2-based pipeline that combines RGB images and LiDAR point clouds. Semantic segmentation is performed using ONNX-exported deep neural networks, with class predictions projected onto corresponding 3D LiDAR data using calibrated extrinsic. The resulting semantically annotated point clouds are fused into a probabilistic 3D representation using an OctoMap, where each voxel stores both occupancy and semantic class information. Multiple encoder–decoder architectures with various backbone configurations are evaluated in terms of segmentation quality, latency, memory footprint, and GPU utilization. Furthermore, a comparison between high and low image resolutions is conducted to assess trade-offs between model accuracy and real-time applicability.
Keywords: semantic mapping; semantic segmentation; autonomous vehicles semantic mapping; semantic segmentation; autonomous vehicles

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Czajka, M.; Krupka, M.; Kubacka, D.; Janiszewski, M.R.; Belter, D. A Comparison of Segmentation Methods for Semantic OctoMap Generation. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 7285. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15137285

AMA Style

Czajka M, Krupka M, Kubacka D, Janiszewski MR, Belter D. A Comparison of Segmentation Methods for Semantic OctoMap Generation. Applied Sciences. 2025; 15(13):7285. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15137285

Chicago/Turabian Style

Czajka, Marcin, Maciej Krupka, Daria Kubacka, Michał Remigiusz Janiszewski, and Dominik Belter. 2025. "A Comparison of Segmentation Methods for Semantic OctoMap Generation" Applied Sciences 15, no. 13: 7285. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15137285

APA Style

Czajka, M., Krupka, M., Kubacka, D., Janiszewski, M. R., & Belter, D. (2025). A Comparison of Segmentation Methods for Semantic OctoMap Generation. Applied Sciences, 15(13), 7285. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15137285

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop