Improving the Spatial Resolution of Mechanical LiDAR Systems Using a Virtual Mirror Channel and Automatic Calibration
https://doi.org/10.15514/ISPRAS-2026-38(3)-38
Abstract
This paper proposes an approach to increase the density and quality of point clouds produced by mechanical LiDAR by introducing an adjustable passive optical element–a mirror. We analyze how the mirror position affects accuracy and geometric detail of scanned objects. Experiments show that mirror-assisted augmentation combined with the proposed automatic calibration algorithm (GPC – Ground Plane Consistency) significantly increases point density while preserving high geometric accuracy. The method does not require dedicated calibration targets and keeps the sensor design simple. Practical experiments and simulation results demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach.
Supporting agencies: The research was supported by the Department of Engineering Cybernetics at NUST MISIS.
About the Authors
Mark Romanovich VISHNEVSKIY
NUST MISIS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Postgraduate student, assistant at the Department of Engineering Cybernetics of the National University of Science and Technology MISIS. Research interests: mobile robotics, computer vision, LiDAR systems, point cloud processing and filtering algorithms.
Igor Yuryevich FEDOROV
NUST MISIS
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Cand. Sci. (Phys.-Math.), associate professor at the Department of Engineering Cybernetics of the National University of Science and Technology MISIS. Research interests: multi-camera vision systems, 3D reconstruction, neural network-based object detection, and integration of artificial intelligence into robotic systems.
References
1. Anand V., Lohani B., Pandey G., Mishra R. Advancing LiDAR intensity simulation through learning with novel physics-based modalities. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2025. DOI: 10.1109/TITS.2025.3532687.
2. Bharati V. LiDAR+ camera sensor data fusion on mobiles with AI-based virtual sensors to provide situational awareness for the visually impaired. In Proc. of the 2021 IEEE Sensors Applications Symposium (SAS), 2021, pp. 1-6. DOI: 10.1109/SAS51076.2021.9530102.
3. Shomer A., Avidan S. Prior based sampling for adaptive LiDAR. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.07099, 2023. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.07099, accessed 01.02.2026.
4. Zhou Y., Sun P., Zhang Y., Anguelov D., Gao J., Ouyang T., Guo J., Ngiam J., Vasudevan V. End-to-end multi-view fusion for 3D object detection in LiDAR point clouds. In Proc. of the Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL), 2020, vol. 100, pp. 923-932. Available at: https://proceedings.mlr.press/v100/zhou20a.html, accessed 01.02.2026.
5. Schrab K., Hilgerdenaar F., Protzmann R., Radusch I. Improving object detection through multi-perspective LiDAR fusion. In Proc. of the 11th International Conference on Vehicle Technology and Intelligent Transport Systems (VEHITS 2025), 2025, pp. 448-457. DOI: 10.5220/0013283600003941.
6. Kumar U. R., Coudron I., Puttemans S., Vandewalle P. Quality assessment for 3D reconstruction of building interiors. Journal of Imaging Science and Technology, 2018, vol. 62, issue 1, pp. 010402-1–010402-10. DOI: 10.2352/J.ImagingSci.Technol.2018.62.1.010402.
7. Oude Elberink S. J., Vosselman G. Quality analysis on 3D building models reconstructed from airborne laser scanning data. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 2012, vol. 66, pp. 157-165. DOI: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2011.10.005.
8. Mitka B., Klapa P., Gawronek P. Laboratory tests of metrological characteristics of a non-repetitive low-cost mobile handheld laser scanner. Sensors, 2024, vol. 24, issue 18, Art. 6010. DOI: 10.3390/s24186010.
9. Ramlal B., Archibald D., Al-Tahir R., Sutherland M., Davis D. Assessment of multi-perspective and multi-sensor data for urban strata mapping. Research Square, 2023. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2599958/v1.
10. Wang D., Watkins C., Xie H. MEMS mirrors for LiDAR: a review. Micromachines, 2020, vol. 11, issue 5, Art. 456. DOI: 10.3390/mi11050456.
11. Yang D., Liu Y., Chen Q., Chen M., Zhan S., Cheung N.-K., Chan H.-Y., Wang Z., Li W.J. Development of the high angular resolution 360° LiDAR based on scanning MEMS mirror. Scientific Reports, 2023, vol. 13, Art. 1540. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-26394-6.
12. Xu W., Yuan Q., Yang Y., Lu L., Chen J., Zhou L. Progress and prospects for LiDAR-oriented optical phased arrays based on photonic integrated circuits. npj Nanophotonics, 2025, vol. 2, Art. 14. DOI: 10.1038/s44310-025-00059-4.
13. Fu Y., Chen B., Yue W., Tao M., Zhao H., Li Y., Li X., Qu H., Li X., Hu X., Song J. Target-adaptive optical phased array LiDAR. Photonics Research, 2024, vol. 12, issue 5, pp. 904-911. DOI: 10.1364/PRJ.514468.
14. Kasturi A., Milanović V., Lovell D., Hu F., Ho D., Su Y., Ristić Lj. Comparison of MEMS mirror LiDAR architectures. In Proc. of MOEMS and Miniaturized Systems XIX, 2020, vol. 11293, pp. 63-79. DOI: 10.1117/12.2556248.
15. Altuntas C. Review of scanning and pixel array-based lidar point-cloud measurement techniques to capture 3d shape or motion. Applied Sciences, 2023, vol. 13, issue 11, Art. 6488. DOI: 10.3390/app13116488.
16. Hsu C.-P., Li B., Solano-Rivas B., Gohil A. R., Chan P. H., Moore A. D., Donzella V. A review and perspective on optical phased array for automotive lidar. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, 2021, vol. 27, issue 1, pp. 1-16. DOI: 10.1109/JSTQE.2020.3022948.
17. Fatemi R., Khachaturian A., Hajimiri A. A nonuniform sparse 2-d large-fov optical phased array with a low-power pwm drive. IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, 2019, vol. 54, issue 5, pp. 1200-1215. DOI: 10.1109/JSSC.2019.2896767.
18. Yang D., Li W. J., Chen M., Yu X., Chen Q., Zhang G. Enhancing point cloud density using MEMS mirror-based focusing for LiDAR systems. Research Square, 2024. DOI: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4652241/v1.
19. Raj T., Hashim F. H., Huddin A. B., Ibrahim M. F., Hussain A. A survey on LiDAR scanning mechanisms. Electronics, 2020, vol. 9, issue 5, Art. 741. DOI: 10.3390/electronics9050741.
20. Zhou J. A review of LiDAR sensor technologies for perception in automated driving. Academic Journal of Science and Technology, 2022, vol. 3, issue 3, pp. 255-261. DOI: 10.54097/ajst.v3i3.2993.
21. Kim T.-H., Park T.-H. Placement optimization of multiple LiDAR sensors for autonomous vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2020, vol. 21, issue 5, pp. 2139-2145. DOI: 10.1109/TITS.2019.2915087.
22. Pogačnik M., Munih M. Towards a multi-perspective time of flight laser ranging device based on mirrors and prisms. Applied Sciences, 2022, vol. 12, issue 14, Art. 7121. DOI: 10.3390/app12147121.
23. Kibii J. E., Dreher A., Wormser P. L., Gimpel H. Design and calibration of plane mirror setups for mobile robots with a 2D-Lidar. Sensors, 2022, vol. 22, issue 20, Art. 7830. DOI: 10.3390/s22207830.
24. Matsubara K., Nagatani K., Hirata Y. Improvement in measurement area of 3D LiDAR for a mobile robot using a mirror mounted on a manipulator. In Proc. of the 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2020, pp. 9523-9530. DOI: 10.1109/IROS45743.2020.9340822.
25. Shaker A., Yan W. Y., El-Ashmawy N. The effects of laser reflection angle on radiometric correction of the airborne LiDAR intensity data. In Proc. of ISPRS Archives, 2011, vol. XXXVIII-5/W12, pp. 213-218. DOI: 10.5194/isprsarchives-XXXVIII-5-W12-213-2011.
26. Goettsche J., Alexopoulos S., Dümmler A., Maddineni S. K. Multi-mirror array calculations with optical error. In Proc. of SolarPACES 2020 International Conference, 2020, Paper ID 02005. Available at: https://www.comsol.com/paper/multi-mirror-array-calculations-with-optical-error-95421, accessed 01.02.2026.
27. Fischler M. A., Bolles R. C. Random sample consensus: a paradigm for model fitting with applications to image analysis and automated cartography. Communications of the ACM, 1981, vol. 24, issue 6, pp. 381-395. DOI: 10.1145/358669.358692.
28. Kelly C., Wilkinson B., Abd-Elrahman A., Cordero O., Lassiter H. A. Accuracy assessment of low-cost LiDAR scanners: an analysis of the Velodyne HDL-32E and Livox Mid-40’s temporal stability. Remote Sensing, 2022, vol. 14, issue 17, Art. 4220. DOI: 10.3390/rs14174220.
29. Schulte-Tigges J., Förster M., Nikolovski G., Reke M., Ferrein A., Kaszner D., Matheis D., Walter T. Benchmarking of various LiDAR sensors for use in self-driving vehicles in real-world environments. Sensors, 2022, vol. 22, issue 19, Art. 7146. DOI: 10.3390/s22197146.
30. Pełka M., Będkowski J. Calibration of planar reflectors reshaping LiDAR’s field of view. Sensors, 2021, vol. 21, issue 19, Art. 6501. DOI: 10.3390/s21196501.
31. Będkowski J., Pełka M. Affordable robotic mobile mapping system based on LiDAR with additional rotating planar reflector. Sensors, 2023, vol. 23, issue 3, Art. 1551. DOI: 10.3390/s23031551.
32. Levinson J., Thrun S. Unsupervised calibration for multi-beam lasers. In Proc. of Experimental Robotics. Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics, 2014, vol. 79, pp. 179-193. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-28572-1_13.
Review
For citations:
VISHNEVSKIY M.R., FEDOROV I.Yu. Improving the Spatial Resolution of Mechanical LiDAR Systems Using a Virtual Mirror Channel and Automatic Calibration. Proceedings of the Institute for System Programming of the RAS (Proceedings of ISP RAS). 2026;38(3):101-114. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15514/ISPRAS-2026-38(3)-38
Email this article 