Learning to Evaluate Perception Models Using Planner-Centric Metrics
This addresses the need for more task-relevant evaluation in autonomous driving, though it is incremental as it builds on existing detection metrics.
The paper tackles the problem of evaluating 3D object detection models for self-driving by proposing a planner-centric metric that measures the impact of detections on driving performance, finding that humans agree with this metric 79% of the time in cases of disagreement with standard metrics.
Variants of accuracy and precision are the gold-standard by which the computer vision community measures progress of perception algorithms. One reason for the ubiquity of these metrics is that they are largely task-agnostic; we in general seek to detect zero false negatives or positives. The downside of these metrics is that, at worst, they penalize all incorrect detections equally without conditioning on the task or scene, and at best, heuristics need to be chosen to ensure that different mistakes count differently. In this paper, we propose a principled metric for 3D object detection specifically for the task of self-driving. The core idea behind our metric is to isolate the task of object detection and measure the impact the produced detections would induce on the downstream task of driving. Without hand-designing it to, we find that our metric penalizes many of the mistakes that other metrics penalize by design. In addition, our metric downweighs detections based on additional factors such as distance from a detection to the ego car and the speed of the detection in intuitive ways that other detection metrics do not. For human evaluation, we generate scenes in which standard metrics and our metric disagree and find that humans side with our metric 79% of the time. Our project page including an evaluation server can be found at https://nv-tlabs.github.io/detection-relevance.