# Contour Errors: Ego-Centric Matching for 3D Multi-Object Tracking Performance Evaluation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.04122 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.04122/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 19 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 4 Jun 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 19 of 19)

- [Microsoft COCO: Common Objects in Context](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1405.0312/) (2014)
- [nuScenes: A multimodal dataset for autonomous driving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1903.11027/) (2019)
- [DeepSDF: Learning Continuous Signed Distance Functions for Shape Representation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.05103/) (2019)
- [Scalability in Perception for Autonomous Driving: Waymo Open Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1912.04838/) (2019)
- [Generalized Intersection over Union: A Metric and A Loss for Bounding Box Regression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1902.09630/) (2019)
- [Argoverse 2: Next Generation Datasets for Self-Driving Perception and Forecasting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2301.00493/) (2023)
- [HOTA: A Higher Order Metric for Evaluating Multi-Object Tracking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.07736/) (2020)
- [Distance-IoU Loss: Faster and Better Learning for Bounding Box Regression](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.08287/) (2019)
- [AB3DMOT: A Baseline for 3D Multi-Object Tracking and New Evaluation Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.08063/) (2020)
- [Learning to Evaluate Perception Models Using Planner-Centric Metrics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2004.08745/) (2020)
- [3D Multi-Object Tracking Using Graph Neural Networks with Cross-Edge Modality Attention](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.10926/) (2022)
- [Injecting Planning-Awareness into Prediction and Detection Evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.03270/) (2021)
- [Tracking the Trackers: An Analysis of the State of the Art in Multiple Object Tracking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1704.02781/) (2017)
- [A Novel Benchmarking Paradigm and a Scale- and Motion-Aware Model for Egocentric Pedestrian Trajectory Prediction](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10424/) (2023)
- [Self-Supervised Multi-Object Tracking For Autonomous Driving From Consistency Across Timescales](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.13147/) (2023)
- [Shape-IoU: More Accurate Metric considering Bounding Box Shape and Scale](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.17663/) (2023)
- [EC-IoU: Orienting Safety for Object Detectors via Ego-Centric Intersection-over-Union](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.15474/) (2024)
- [Evaluation Metrics for Object Detection for Autonomous Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.10298/) (2022)
- [Object criticality for safer navigation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.10232/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Effort-Based Criticality Metrics for Evaluating 3D Perception Errors in Autonomous Driving](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.28029/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Open-loop performance evaluation of 3D multi-object tracking in autonomous driving requires matching criteria that effectively penalize translational, shape, and orientation errors from the ego vehicle perspective. The prevailing criteria for determining true positives are Intersection over Union (IoU) and Centre-Point Distances (CPD). When IoU is extended from the 2D image plane to 3D volumetric overlap, it often falls below its acceptance threshold even with minor yaw misalignments, whereas CPD disregards orientation entirely. To address this limitation, we propose Contour Errors (CE) as an ego-centric criterion that employs Hausdorff-type reasoning to sparse bounding-box corner geometry by selecting the k-nearest ego-centric corners. This method provides a graded orientation sensitivity between the extremes of IoU, which overpenalizes, and CPD, which is orientation-blind. We evaluate Contour Errors against six baselines using the HOTA evaluation protocol on the nuScenes dataset, conditioned on proximity, yaw error, and a confidence threshold. At the standard IoU vehicle threshold, 47% of car and 75% of pedestrian CE-valid matches are rejected by IoU despite close contour proximity, while fewer than 0.1% of IoU-valid matches fail CE. These results establish the ego-centric matching criterion as a primary factor for improving open-loop perception evaluation in safety-critical autonomous driving.