mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

What data do we need for training an AV motion planner?

arXiv 2105.12337 ↗First posted 26 May 2021cs.RO cs.CV cs.LGcited by 15

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We investigate what grade of sensor data is required for training an imitation-learning-based AV planner on human expert demonstration. Machine-learned planners are very hungry for training data, which is usually collected using vehicles equipped with the same sensors used for autonomous operation. This is costly and non-scalable. If cheaper sensors could be used for collection instead, data availability would go up, which is crucial in a field where data volume requirements are large and availability is small. We present experiments using up to 1000 hours worth of expert demonstration and find that training with 10x lower-quality data outperforms 1x AV-grade data in terms of planner performance. The important implication of this is that cheaper sensors can indeed be used. This serves to improve data access and democratize the field of imitation-based motion planning. Alongside this, we perform a sensitivity analysis of planner performance as a function of perception range, field-of-view, accuracy, and data volume, and the reason why lower-quality data still provide good planning results.

Key facts. Cited by 15 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2021.

Builds on

23 of 28 references.

References · 23

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,199
  3. 2014Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Contextcited by 17,498
  4. 2020A Simple Framework for Contrastive Learning of Visual Representationscited by 11,979
  5. 2019Momentum Contrast for Unsupervised Visual Representation Learningcited by 7,482
  6. 2019nuScenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous drivingcited by 4,485
  7. 2015VQA: Visual Question Answeringcited by 2,489
  8. 2017CyCADA: Cycle-Consistent Adversarial Domain Adaptationcited by 1,079
  9. 2016End to End Learning for Self-Driving Carscited by 1,000
  10. 2019Argoverse: 3D Tracking and Forecasting with Rich Mapscited by 728
  11. 2020VectorNet: Encoding HD Maps and Agent Dynamics from Vectorized Representationcited by 528
  12. 2018ChauffeurNet: Learning to Drive by Imitating the Best and Synthesizing the Worstcited by 391
11 more
  1. 2016Unsupervised Pixel-Level Domain Adaptation with Generative Adversarial Networkscited by 307
  2. 2016A Survey of Motion Planning and Control Techniques for Self-driving Urban Vehiclescited by 251
  3. 2021End-to-end Interpretable Neural Motion Plannercited by 240
  4. 2020One Thousand and One Hours: Self-driving Motion Prediction Datasetcited by 239
  5. 2020A Survey of End-to-End Driving: Architectures and Training Methodscited by 123
  6. 2020Instance-aware, Context-focused, and Memory-efficient Weakly Supervised Object Detectioncited by 80
  7. 2018On Offline Evaluation of Vision-based Driving Modelscited by 62
  8. 2020Learning to Evaluate Perception Models Using Planner-Centric Metricscited by 49
  9. 2018Learning Linear Transformations for Fast Arbitrary Style Transfercited by 48
  10. 2015Image Question Answering using Convolutional Neural Network with Dynamic Parameter Predictioncited by 26
  11. 2020Testing the Safety of Self-driving Vehicles by Simulating Perception and Predictioncited by 12

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2021: 1; 2022: 3; 2023: 4; 2024: 1; 2025: 5; 2026: 1.

15 papers.

Sort:

By area: