Skip to content
Back to skills

Kitti Lidar Flow Eval

ASecurity

This evaluation probes a model's ability to estimate dense optical flow directly from sparse, noisy LiDAR range scans without using RGB images. It measures prediction accuracy against real-world ground truth flow maps and evaluates robustness to occlusions and foreground/background motion. Use when the user wants to benchmark on KITTI Tracking & Flow 2015, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports EPE (End-Point-Error).

  • 3 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 11, 2026
researchpython

Works with

  • cli

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 11, 2026

npx -y skills add qhjqhj00/research-skills-pool --skill kitti-lidar-flow-eval --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Kitti Lidar Flow Eval?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Kitti Lidar Flow Eval
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/qhjqhj00-kitti-lidar-flow-eval/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/qhjqhj00-kitti-lidar-flow-eval)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: kitti-lidar-flow-eval
description: This evaluation probes a model's ability to estimate dense optical flow directly from sparse, noisy LiDAR range scans without using RGB images. It measures prediction accuracy against real-world ground truth flow maps and evaluates robustness to occlusions and foreground/background motion. Use when the user wants to benchmark on KITTI Tracking & Flow 2015, or asks about evaluating this task. Reports EPE (End-Point-Error).
metadata:
  skill_kind: dataset_eval
  source_arxiv: 1808.10542
  bibtex_key: [REDACTED]
  confidence: high
---

# kitti-lidar-flow-eval

> Hallucinating Dense Optical Flow from Sparse Lidar for Autonomous Vehicles — Victor Vaquero, Alberto Sanfeliu, Francesc Moreno-Noguer (2018) (arXiv:1808.10542, 2018)

## What this evaluates

This evaluation probes a model's ability to estimate dense optical flow directly from sparse, noisy LiDAR range scans without using RGB images. It measures prediction accuracy against real-world ground truth flow maps and evaluates robustness to occlusions and foreground/background motion.

## Datasets

- **KITTI Tracking & Flow 2015** — total 19045; splits: train (17500), val (1455), test (90)

## Metrics

- `EPE (End-Point-Error)` **(primary)** — range: pixels
  - Average Euclidean distance between predicted and ground-truth optical flow vectors across all pixels.
- `Outlier Percentage` — range: percent
  - Percentage of pixels where the EPE is less than 3 pixels or less than 5% of the ground-truth flow magnitude.

## Input / output format

**Input**: Consecutive pairs of sparse LiDAR scans (Velodyne HDL-64) containing range and reflectivity values, formatted as 64x384 grids.

**Output**: Dense optical flow map with 2D displacement vectors per pixel, resolution 256x1224.

## Scoring recipe

```python
def compute_metrics(pred_flow, gt_flow):
    # pred_flow, gt_flow: (H, W, 2) arrays
    diff = pred_flow - gt_flow
    epe = np.mean(np.sqrt(np.sum(diff**2, axis=-1)))
    gt_mag = np.sqrt(np.sum(gt_flow**2, axis=-1))
    outlier = (np.sqrt(np.sum(diff**2, axis=-1)) < 3) | \
              (np.sqrt(np.sum(diff**2, axis=-1)) / (gt_mag + 1e-6) < 0.05)
    return epe, np.mean(outlier) * 100
```

## Common pitfalls

- The test set is extremely small (90 pairs) because it requires matching RGB frames from KITTI Flow 2015 with LiDAR frames from the Tracking benchmark.
- Training uses pseudo-ground-truth flow generated by FlowNet2 on RGB images, but evaluation against real ground-truth is required for benchmark comparison.
- The outlier threshold uses an OR condition (<3px OR <5%), not an AND condition, which significantly changes the reported percentage.

## Evidence (verbatim from paper)

> A pixel is considered to be correctly estimated if the End-Point-Error (EPE) calculated as the averaged Euclidean distance between the prediction and the real ground-truth $G_{Test}$ is $<3$px or $<5$%. These measurements are averaged over background regions only, over foreground regions only, and over all ground truth pixels, which respectively are denoted in Table I as “Fl-BG”, “Fl-FG” and “All”.

## Citation

```bibtex
@misc{vaquero2018hallucinating,
  title={Hallucinating Dense Optical Flow from Sparse Lidar for Autonomous Vehicles},
  author={Victor Vaquero, Alberto Sanfeliu, Francesc Moreno-Noguer (2018)},
  year={2018},
  note={arXiv:1808.10542}
}
```

- arXiv: 1808.10542

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.