Repository navigation
Exact type classification of minivan unclear #909
Description
In
open-simulation-interface/osi_object.proto
Lines 868 to 871 in 689eab7
it is mentioned that a minivan shall be classified as a car, but not exactly which car type shall be used.
Describe the bug
In
open-simulation-interface/osi_object.proto
Lines 868 to 871 in 689eab7
it is mentioned that a minivan shall be classified as a car, but not exactly which car type shall be used.
Describe how to reproduce the bug
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
- Read the documentation
Describe the expected behavior
One explicitly defined class for minivans such as TYPE_CAR
Show some screenshots
N.A.
Describe the OS you are using
N.A.
Additional context
Additionally, I expect that this will cause a lot of unnecessary issues when checking sensor output against ground truth since the vehicle perception systems will have a very hard time deciding between a car type minivan and other vans. After all the shape is the main decision criteria, since the perception system has no direct access to vehicle weight information and other details used for the UNECE classification.
I think a) this needs to be re-considered and b) at least one explicit category for minivans needs to be defined if it stays like this.
My personal recommendation would be to losen this and allow this category to be used for minivans as well. Additionally, we should cross-check whether another UNECE classification or ISO norm more related to ADAS/AD/DCAS/Sensors etc. can be used as a reference instead of the one that has been used.
Activity
pmai commentedon Jul 9, 2026
Since all other types are deprecated, only TYPE_CAR remains, so currently there is no ambiguity, and the specific wording is BTW part of the harmonized ASAM enum definition, hence any change would require a change there (which would be hard to do, as the different classifications in different standards have different specific syntax for the car classification).
Since all of this is centered around fully harmonized definitions, any discussion would need to happen in the harmonization groups, as OSI cannot single-handedly deviate here.
I also already pointed out in the OpenSCENARIO discussion that e.g. sensor standards like ISO 23150 do not have any finer-granular required classifications, which is unsurprising, since for most purposes the distinction between "a car" and "a minivan" is as useful as the distinction between "a car" and "a cabrio", "a coupe". Based on size, usually there are cut-offs that will keep most "carish" things as CAR, and something that is clearly much larger in the TYPE_VAN category. Whether what something that is coloquially termed "minivan" then ends up in the TYPE_CAR or TYPE_VAN category depends on the size of the things, which differ wildly (e.g. the Peugeot 1007 can colloquially be termed a mini-van with just 3.7m length and 1.6m height, just as a Renault Espace is commonly termed a minivan, which is nearly 5m in length and 1.8m in height, or the Plymouth Grand Voyager).
As discussed there, if more shape-centered classifications are wanted/needed, these can of course be designed, but again this needs to be a harmonized thing across OpenX standards.
johschmitz commentedon Jul 9, 2026
To resolve this for now in a pragmatic way I created #910
asadekasam commentedon Jul 30, 2026
OSI CCB 30.07.2026: The opinion here that it should be harmonized across all OpenX Standards. If there is a project that will address this issue, it should be a comprehensive project, scanning several use cases to cover as much as possible of vehicle types such as Trucks, flatbeds, etc. ASAM office will add it to the next Coordination group for further discussion.