Towards Robust Sensor-Fusion Ground SLAM: A Comprehensive Benchmark and A Resilient Framework
Abstract
Domain fit: Niche / domain-specific · No strong AI-core implementation/artifact signals were detected from current providers.
Considerable advancements have been achieved in SLAM methods tailored for structured environments, yet their robustness under challenging corner cases remains a critical limitation. Although multi-sensor fusion approaches integrating diverse sensors have shown promising performance improvements, the research community faces two key barriers: On one hand, the lack of standardized and configurable benchmarks that systematically evaluate SLAM algorithms under diverse degradation scenarios hinders comprehensive performance assessment. While on the other hand, existing SLAM frameworks primarily focus on fusing a limited set of sensor types, without effectively addressing adaptive sensor selection strategies for varying environmental conditions.To bridge these gaps, we make three key contributions: First, we introduce M3DGR dataset: a sensor-rich benchmark with systematically induced degradation patterns including visual challenge, LiDAR degeneracy, wheel slippage and GNSS denial. Second, we conduct a comprehensive evaluation of forty SLAM systems on M3DGR, providing critical insights into their robustness and limitations under challenging real-world conditions. Third, we develop a resilient modular multi-sensor fusion framework named Ground-Fusion++, which demonstrates robust performance by coupling GNSS, RGB-D, LiDAR, IMU (Inertial Measurement Unit) and wheel odometry. Codes <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">1</sup> and datasets <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> are publicly available.
Results and benchmarks
Considerable advancements have been achieved in SLAM methods tailored for structured environments, yet their robustness under challenging corner cases remains a critical limitation.
Benchmark evidence is limited
Evidence graph: 2 refs, 1 links.
Utility signals: depth 60/100, grounding 58/100, status medium.
Implementation
No direct implementation yet
Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.
Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.
No verified maintained repo yet
There is no verified maintained implementation yet. Use this baseline plan to decide whether to prototype now or defer.
- No direct maintained implementation was found. Use the paper PDF and citation graph to design a baseline reproduction.
- Track assumptions and missing details in an experiment log before coding.
Time to first repro: a few days
Recommendation evidence is currently too limited for a maintained-repo choice. Use Implementation Status and Reproduction Path for a practical baseline plan.
- Estimate is based on paper-only reproduction flow
Reproduction readiness
No repo
No verified implementation available
- No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.
Hardware requirements
- Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.
Validation caveat
Hugging Face artifacts
No trustworthy direct or curated related Hugging Face artifacts were found yet. Use targeted searches to quickly locate candidate models, datasets, and demos.
Tip: start with models, then check datasets and spaces if you need evaluation data or demos.
Research context
11
Citations
53
References
Tasks
Robustness (evolution), Computer science, Modular design, Simultaneous localization and mapping, Key (lock), Benchmark (surveying), Sensor fusion, Inertial measurement unit
Methods
None detected
Domains
Artificial intelligence, Machine learning
Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.
Open in HFEPXJump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.