MONA: The Munich Motion Dataset of Natural Driving
Open accessAbstract
Real-world datasets facilitate the development of autonomous vehicles, especially when they are accessible, diverse, and provide a measure of accuracy. While existing datasets have been accessible and diverse, they cannot provide any measure of accuracy. To estimate the accuracy of the detection of traffic participants in our setup, we repetitively drove through our observation area with a measurement vehicle with highly accurate localization and LiDAR sensors. Our experiments showed an average overall position accuracy of 0.51 m. The combined data of the autonomous vehicle and the elevated camera setup yield a unique dataset. The elevated view acts as a super sensor of the autonomous vehicle with extended range and reduced occlusions. We employ an auto-labeling system on the stationary camera data to extract trajectories with bounding boxes for each traffic participant. These extracted trajectories are smoothed for kinematic feasibility, and corresponding maps for each location are provided. The Munich Motion Dataset of Natural Driving (MONA) shall empower new research in prediction and planning. Making raw data and code available to the public without license restrictions allows the dataset to be further improved using more advanced algorithms.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Offline perception is crucial to train and evaluate planners using high-quality object tracks, but only present in Waymo, MONA and nuPlan.
“Offline perception [16] is crucial to train and evaluate planners using high-quality object tracks, but only present in Waymo [17], MONA [18] and nuPlan.”
From Towards learning-based planning: The nuPlan benchmark for real-world autonomous driving (2024) · cites this paper as [18]
Cites
Canadian adverse driving conditions dataset
Pitropov, M., Garcia, D. E., Rebello, J., Smart, M., Wang, C., Czarnecki, K., & Waslander, S. (2021) · The International Journal of Robotics Research · doi:10.1177/0278364920979368 · Cited by 286 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Towards learning-based planning: The nuPlan benchmark for real-world autonomous driving
Karnchanachari, N., Geromichalos, D., Tan, K. S., Li, N., Eriksen, C., Yaghoubi, S., Mehdipour, N., Bernasconi, G., Fong, W. K., Guo, Y., et al. (2024) · 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) · doi:10.1109/icra57147.2024.10610077 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
“Offline perception [16] is crucial to train and evaluate planners using high-quality object tracks, but only present in Waymo [17], MONA [18] and nuPlan.”
Background
- Authors
- Gressenbuch, L., Esterle, K., Kessler, T., & Althoff, M.
- Affiliations
- Technical University of Munich (DE)
- Fortiss (DE)
- Venue
- 2022 IEEE 25th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2022-10-08
- Pages
- 2093-2100
- OpenAlex
- W4308080967
- Cited by
- 21
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7
- FWCI
- 4.36
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- mediatum.ub.tum.de
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC) (publishedVersion)
- mediaTUM – the media and publications repository of the Technical University Munich (Technical University Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Traffic and Road Safety
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Vision and Imaging
- Keywords
- autonomous driving, LiDAR, trajectory extraction, auto-labeling, occlusion reduction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review