Accurate localization is crucial for the autonomous operation of mobile robots. Specifically for indoor scenarios, localization algorithms typically rely on a previously generated map. However, many real-world sites like warehouses or healthcare environments violate the underlying assumption that the robot\u2019s surroundings are mainly static. In this paper, we introduce a new dataset plus a benchmark that enables evaluating and comparing indoor localization methods in complex and changing real-world scenarios. While several datasets for indoor scenes exist, only a few combine the long-term localization aspect of repeatedly revisiting the same environment under varying conditions with precise ground truth over multiple rooms. Our dataset comprises various sequences recorded with a wheeled robot covering an office environment. We provide data from two 2D LiDARs, multiple consumer-grade RGB-D cameras, and the robot\u2019s wheel odometry. By densely placing fiducial markers on every room ceiling, we can also provide accurate pose information within a single global frame for the whole environment, estimated through an additional upward-facing camera. We evaluate existing localization algorithms on our data and make the dataset together with a server-based benchmark evaluation publicly available. This facilitates an unbiased evaluation of localization approaches and enables further research on their application in challenging indoor<\/p>\n
scenarios.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Accurate localization is crucial for the autonomous operation of mobile robots. Specifically for indoor scenarios, localization algorithms typically rely on a previously generated map. However, many real-world sites like warehouses or healthcare environments violate the underlying assumption that the robot\u2019s surroundings are mainly static. In this paper, we introduce a new dataset plus a benchmark that enables evaluating and comparing indoor localization methods in complex and changing real-world scenarios. While […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"publication-type":[32],"class_list":["post-32417","publication","type-publication","status-publish","hentry","publication-type-inproceedings"],"acf":[],"publishpress_future_workflow_manual_trigger":{"enabledWorkflows":[]},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/32417","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/publication"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication\/32417\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32417"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"publication-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lamarr-institute.org\/de\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/publication-type?post=32417"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}