Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40871855›Full record

ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025

A Frontier Review of Semantic SLAM Technologies Applied to the Open World.

Le Miao, Wen Liu, Zhongliang Deng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Le MiaoSchool of Electronic Engineering, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China.
Wen LiuSchool of Electronic Engineering, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6450-1969
Zhongliang DengSchool of Electronic Engineering, Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Beijing 100876, China.ORCID 0000-0003-1223-1810

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China No.62372049.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the growing demand for autonomous robotic operations in complex and unstructured environments, traditional semantic SLAM systems-which rely on closed-set semantic vocabularies-are increasingly limited in their ability to robustly perceive and understand diverse and dynamic scenes. This paper focuses on the paradigm shift toward open-world semantic scene understanding in SLAM and provides a comprehensive review of the technological evolution from closed-world assumptions to open-world frameworks. We survey the current state of research in open-world semantic SLAM, highlighting key challenges and frontiers. In particular, we conduct an in-depth analysis of three critical areas: zero-shot open-vocabulary understanding, dynamic semantic expansion, and multimodal semantic fusion. These capabilities are examined for their crucial roles in unknown class identification, incremental semantic updates, and multisensor perceptual integration. Our main contribution is presenting the first systematic algorithmic benchmarking and performance comparison of representative open-world semantic SLAM systems, revealing the potential of these core techniques to enhance semantic understanding in complex environments. Finally, we propose several promising directions for future research, including lightweight model deployment, real-time performance optimization, and collaborative multimodal perception, and offering a systematic reference and methodological guidance for continued advancements in this emerging field.

Indexed as

multimodal sensor fusionopen-world perceptionrobotic perceptionsemantic SLAMzero-shot learning

Identifiers

PMID40871855
PMCPMC12390180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.