← 研踪 PaperTrailarXiv:2611.16472 · v1
RGB-D SLAM on the Edge: Benchmarking and Profiling RTAB-Map and ORB-SLAM3 on the Raspberry Pi 5
首次提交 2026-11-12 16:29
版本更新 2026-11-12 16:29
雷达观测 2026-11-13 14:15
摘要
Micro aerial vehicles that operate without GPS often run SLAM on ARM-based edge boards, yet there is little published data on how standard RGB-D SLAM systems behave on such hardware. We benchmark RTAB-Map and ORB-SLAM3 on the Raspberry Pi 5 using six TUM RGB-D sequences at three image resolutions, recording tracking coverage, trajectory error, time per frame, memory, CPU load and temperature for every run, and we profile both systems at the stage and function level. RTAB-Map was configured to process and keep every frame, so its back end runs on every frame rather than at its default rate of 1 Hz. On the sequences that every configuration tracked, its front end takes 38-74 ms per frame and its full pipeline 150-462 ms, compared with 13-45 ms and 26-62 ms for ORB-SLAM3. RTAB-Map's main cost is optimizing a pose graph that keeps growing, because its working memory is unbounded by default; ORB-SLAM3's local bundle adjustment costs about as much as its tracking but runs in a parallel thread. At quarter resolution, both systems lose tracking on most sequences, and runs that lose tracking finish sooner and report lower error on the poses they keep, so time and accuracy must be read alongside coverage. Timing is repeatable to within 1-5%, but trajectory error varies by up to 27% between identical runs, so the accuracy differences between the two systems are inconclusive. No thermal throttling occurred.
观测到的版本
相邻记录可能跳过中间版本；首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。
v1 · 2026-11-12 16:29 · 最新观测版本
RGB-D SLAM on the Edge: Benchmarking and Profiling RTAB-Map and ORB-SLAM3 on the Raspberry Pi 5
Micro aerial vehicles that operate without GPS often run SLAM on ARM-based edge boards, yet there is little published data on how standard RGB-D SLAM systems behave on such hardware. We benchmark RTAB-Map and ORB-SLAM3 on the Raspberry Pi 5 using six TUM RGB-D sequences at three image resolutions, recording tracking coverage, trajectory error, time per frame, memory, CPU load and temperature for every run, and we profile both systems at the stage and function level. RTAB-Map was configured to process and keep every frame, so its back end runs on every frame rather than at its default rate of 1 Hz. On the sequences that every configuration tracked, its front end takes 38-74 ms per frame and its full pipeline 150-462 ms, compared with 13-45 ms and 26-62 ms for ORB-SLAM3. RTAB-Map's main cost is optimizing a pose graph that keeps growing, because its working memory is unbounded by default; ORB-SLAM3's local bundle adjustment costs about as much as its tracking but runs in a parallel thread. At quarter resolution, both systems lose tracking on most sequences, and runs that lose tracking finish sooner and report lower error on the poses they keep, so time and accuracy must be read alongside coverage. Timing is repeatable to within 1-5%, but trajectory error varies by up to 27% between identical runs, so the accuracy differences between the two systems are inconclusive. No thermal throttling occurred.
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗