Effort-Based Criticality Metrics for Evaluating 3D Perception Errors in Autonomous Driving
On the map: End-to-end autonomous driving → End-to-end system architecture
Abstract (arXiv)
Criticality metrics such as time-to-collision (TTC) quantify collision urgency but do not distinguish the operational consequences of false-positive (FP) and false-negative (FN) perception errors. We formulate two error-specific effort metrics: False Speed Reduction (FSR), the cumulative velocity loss associated with persistent phantom detections, and Maximum Deceleration Rate (MDR), the peak braking demand associated with missed objects under a longitudinal kinematic model. These longitudinal metrics are complemented by Lateral Evasion Acceleration (LEA), adapted from prior lateral-evasion kinematics and coupled with reachability-based collision timing. The collision check quantifies the minimum steering effort required to avoid a predicted collision. A dynamically conservative, semantically unfiltered reachability gate selects candidate interactions before frame-level scoring and track-level aggregation. Evaluation on nuScenes and Argoverse 2 shows that 65% to 93% of errors fall below the chosen criticality thresholds. Correlation and threshold analysis indicate that the proposed metrics provide complementary rankings for screening and mining perception failures and are not substitutes for closed-loop safety validation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in End-to-end system architecture, one of 9 directions in End-to-end autonomous driving. Builds on 15 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Mar 2026.
Builds on
15 of 28 references.
Closest ancestors · 1
Same direction, newest first
Other references · 14
- 2020Center-based 3D Object Detection and Trackingcited by 1,143
- 2022BEVFusion: Multi-Task Multi-Sensor Fusion with Unified Bird's-Eye View Representationcited by 844
- 2023Argoverse 2: Next Generation Datasets for Self-Driving Perception and Forecastingcited by 701
- 2020Learning to Evaluate Perception Models Using Planner-Centric Metricscited by 49
- 2021Criticality Metrics for Automated Driving: A Review and Suitability Analysis of the State of the Artcited by 30
- 2024Progressive Multi-Modal Fusion for Robust 3D Object Detectioncited by 10
- 2020Safety-Aware Hardening of 3D Object Detection Neural Network Systemscited by 9
- 2022Evaluating Object (mis)Detection from a Safety and Reliability Perspective: Discussion and Measurescited by 8
- 2023Efficient Learning of Urban Driving Policies Using Bird's-Eye-View State Representationscited by 6
- 2022USC: Uncompromising Spatial Constraints for Safety-Oriented 3D Object Detectors in Autonomous Drivingcited by 5
- 2025A Comprehensive Safety Metric to Evaluate Perception in Autonomous Systemscited by 4
- 2024A Flow-based Credibility Metric for Safety-critical Pedestrian Detectioncited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Scalable Offline Metrics for Autonomous Driving
- 2025Towards Benchmarking and Assessing the Safety and Robustness of Autonomous Driving on Safety-critical Scenarios
- 2026When the Score Becomes the Target: Rethinking Metric Validity in Autonomous Driving
- 2023On Offline Evaluation of 3D Object Detection for Autonomous Driving
- 2026Drive-P2D: A Progressive Perception-to-Decision Benchmark for VLMs in Autonomous Driving
- 2025Foundation Models for Autonomous Driving Perception: A Survey Through Core Capabilities
- 2026ExceptionDrive: A Planning-Oriented Counterfactual Corner-Case Benchmark for Autonomous Driving
- 2026Localized Conformal Safety Monitoring with Vision-Language Models for Autonomous Driving