Next Article in Journal
American Sign Language Alphabet Recognition by Extracting Feature from Hand Pose Estimation
Previous Article in Journal
Automated Driving with Cooperative Perception Based on CVFH and Millimeter-Wave V2I Communications for Safe and Efficient Passing through Intersections
Article

Evaluating Localization Accuracy of Automated Driving Systems

Mobility & Transport Analytics Group, Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH, 5020 Salzburg, Austria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Chris Rizos
Sensors 2021, 21(17), 5855; https://doi.org/10.3390/s21175855
Received: 5 July 2021 / Revised: 20 August 2021 / Accepted: 26 August 2021 / Published: 30 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Vehicular Sensing)
Automated driving systems are in need of accurate localization, i.e., achieving accuracies below 0.1 m at confidence levels above 95%. Although during the last decade numerous localization techniques have been proposed, a common methodology to validate their accuracies in relation to a ground-truth dataset is missing so far. This work aims at closing this gap by evaluating four different methods for validating localization accuracies of a vehicle’s position trajectory to different ground truths: (1) a static driving-path, (2) the lane-centerline of a high-definition (HD) map with validated accuracy, (3) localized vehicle body overlaps of the lane-boundaries of a HD map, and (4) longitudinal accuracy at stop points. The methods are evaluated using two localization test datasets, one acquired by an automated vehicle following a static driving path, being additionally equipped with roof-mounted localization systems, and a second dataset acquired from manually-driven connected vehicles. Results show the broad applicability of the approach for evaluating localization accuracy and reveal the pros and cons of the different methods and ground truths. Results also show the feasibility of achieving localization accuracies below 0.1 m at confidence levels up to 99.9% for high-quality localization systems, while at the same time demonstrate that such accuracies are still challenging to achieve. View Full-Text
Keywords: automated driving; localization accuracy evaluation; ground-truth automated driving; localization accuracy evaluation; ground-truth
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Rehrl, K.; Gröchenig, S. Evaluating Localization Accuracy of Automated Driving Systems. Sensors 2021, 21, 5855. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21175855

AMA Style

Rehrl K, Gröchenig S. Evaluating Localization Accuracy of Automated Driving Systems. Sensors. 2021; 21(17):5855. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21175855

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rehrl, Karl, and Simon Gröchenig. 2021. "Evaluating Localization Accuracy of Automated Driving Systems" Sensors 21, no. 17: 5855. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21175855

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop