Impact of 3D LiDAR Resolution in Graph-based SLAM Approaches: A Comparative Study

TL;DR

This work surveys recent 3D LiDAR-based Graph-SLAM methods in urban environments, aiming to compare their strengths, weaknesses, and limitations, and evaluates their robustness regarding the LiDAR resolution namely 64 vs 128 channels.

Abstract

Simultaneous Localization and Mapping (SLAM) is a key component of autonomous systems operating in environments that require a consistent map for reliable localization. SLAM has been a widely studied topic for decades with most of the solutions being camera or LiDAR based. Early LiDAR-based approaches primarily relied on 2D data, whereas more recent frameworks use 3D data. In this work, we survey recent 3D LiDAR-based Graph-SLAM methods in urban environments, aiming to compare their strengths, weaknesses, and limitations. Additionally, we evaluate their robustness regarding the LiDAR resolution namely 64 $vs$ 128 channels. Regarding SLAM methods, we evaluate SC-LeGO-LOAM, SC-LIO-SAM, Cartographer, and HDL-Graph on real-world urban environments using the KITTI odometry dataset (a LiDAR with 64-channels only) and a new dataset (AUTONOMOS-LABS). The latter dataset, collected using instrumented vehicles driving in Berlin suburban area, comprises both 64 and 128 LiDARs. The experimental results are reported in terms of quantitative `metrics' and complemented by qualitative maps.

Figures (3)

• Figure 1: Example of a representative LiDAR Graph-based SLAM framework.
• Figure 2: Estimated paths on the KITTI Odometry dataset.
• Figure 3: Estimated paths on the AUTONOMOS-LABS dataset.