Papers › Benchmarking the Robustness of LiDAR-Camera Fusion for 3D Object Detection

Benchmarking the Robustness of LiDAR-Camera Fusion for 3D Object Detection

30 May 2022arXiv:2205.14951archive 2025-07-28

Kaicheng Yu, Tang Tao, Hongwei Xie, Zhiwei Lin, Zhongwei Wu, Zhongyu Xia, TingTing Liang, Haiyang Sun, Jiong Deng, Dayang Hao, Yongtao Wang, Xiaodan Liang, Bing Wang

There are two critical sensors for 3D perception in autonomous driving, the camera and the LiDAR. The camera provides rich semantic information such as color, texture, and the LiDAR reflects the 3D shape and locations of surrounding objects. People discover that fusing these two modalities can significantly boost the performance of 3D perception models as each modality has complementary information to the other. However, we observe that current datasets are captured from expensive vehicles that are explicitly designed for data collection purposes, and cannot truly reflect the realistic data distribution due to various reasons. To this end, we collect a series of real-world cases with noisy data distribution, and systematically formulate a robustness benchmark toolkit, that simulates these cases on any clean autonomous driving datasets. We showcase the effectiveness of our toolkit by establishing the robustness benchmark on two widely-adopted autonomous driving datasets, nuScenes and Waymo, then, to the best of our knowledge, holistically benchmark the state-of-the-art fusion methods for the first time. We observe that: i) most fusion methods, when solely developed on these data, tend to fail inevitably when there is a disruption to the LiDAR input; ii) the improvement of the camera input is significantly inferior to the LiDAR one. We further propose an efficient robust training strategy to improve the robustness of the current fusion method. The benchmark and code are available at https://github.com/kcyu2014/lidar-camera-robust-benchmark

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

4 samples harvested; 4 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 0 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 4 of the 4 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from kcyu2014/lidar-camera-robust-benchmark. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Tasks

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections