ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Comparative Performance Evaluation of Multi-Type LiDAR Sensors and Their Applicability to Sidewalk HD Mapping.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sidewalk high-definition (HD) maps require centimetre-level representation of pedestrian barriers to support mobility assistance and barrier-free infrastructure management. This study evaluates six mobile light detection and ranging (LiDAR) platforms for sidewalk HD mapping: terrestrial laser scanning (TLS), a push-cart mobile mapping system (MMS), two backpack systems (GNSS/INS (Global Navigation Satellite System/Inertial Navigation System)-aided and SLAM (simultaneous localization and mapping)-based), and two handheld systems (GNSS/INS-aided and SLAM-based). Surveys were conducted at two sites with contrasting occlusion and GNSS conditions (park and dense downtown corridors). Point clouds were transformed to a common control network, with independent checkpoints for absolute accuracy. The reference dataset achieved a planimetric root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.017-0.049 m and vertical RMSE of 0.009-0.014 m across sites. Platforms were compared for positional accuracy, point density, and extractability of key accessibility attributes (effective width, step height, and longitudinal slope). Cart-mounted MMS provided stable geometry under occlusion, while SLAM-based handheld mapping improved robustness in GNSS-degraded areas; backpack SLAM performance depended on loop-closure opportunities and scene dynamics. We provide guidance on selecting pedestrian-scale LiDAR platforms for sidewalk HD mapping under different survey conditions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.