# What Matters in Range View 3D Object Detection

Source: [What Matters in Range View 3D Object Detection](<https://www.sota2.com/research/paper/68fa74411e209131cea608f8>)

Collection index: [llms.txt](<https://www.sota2.com/research/llms.txt>)

Data updated: 2025-10-26T03:05:50.207Z

Authors: Benjamin Wilson, Nicholas Autio Mitchell, Jhony Kaesemodel Pontes, James Hays

Published: 2024-07-23T18:42:37.000Z

## Abstract

Lidar-based perception pipelines rely on 3D object detection models to interpret complex scenes. While multiple representations for lidar exist, the range-view is enticing since it losslessly encodes the entire lidar sensor output. In this work, we achieve state-of-the-art amongst range-view 3D object detection models without using multiple techniques proposed in past range-view literature. We explore range-view 3D object detection across two modern datasets with substantially different properties: Argoverse 2 and Waymo Open. Our investigation reveals key insights: (1) input feature dimensionality significantly influences the overall performance, (2) surprisingly, employing a classification loss grounded in 3D spatial proximity works as well or better compared to more elaborate IoU-based losses, and (3) addressing non-uniform lidar density via a straightforward range subsampling technique outperforms existing multi-resolution, range-conditioned networks. Our experiments reveal that techniques proposed in recent range-view literature are not needed to achieve state-of-the-art performance. Combining the above findings, we establish a new state-of-the-art model for range-view 3D object detection -- improving AP by 2.2% on the Waymo Open dataset while maintaining a runtime of 10 Hz. We establish the first range-view model on the Argoverse 2 dataset and outperform strong voxel-based baselines. All models are multi-class and open-source. Code is available at https://github.com/benjaminrwilson/range-view-3d-detection.

## Recorded benchmark results

A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage.

## Original sources and implementation

[Original paper](<https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.16789>)

[PDF](<https://arxiv.org/pdf/2407.16789.pdf>)
