REVIEW 4 cited by
Decictor: Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Decision-Making in Autonomous Driving Systems
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
Autonomous Driving System (ADS) testing is crucial in ADS development, with the current primary focus being on safety. However, the evaluation of non-safety-critical performance, particularly the ADS's ability to make optimal decisions and produce optimal paths for autonomous vehicles (AVs), is also vital to ensure the intelligence and reduce risks of AVs. Currently, there is little work dedicated to assessing the robustness of ADSs' path-planning decisions (PPDs), i.e., whether an ADS can maintain the optimal PPD after an insignificant change in the environment. The key challenges include the lack of clear oracles for assessing PPD optimality and the difficulty in searching for scenarios that lead to non-optimal PPDs. To fill this gap, in this paper, we focus on evaluating the robustness of ADSs' PPDs and propose the first method, Decictor, for generating non-optimal decision scenarios (NoDSs), where the ADS does not plan optimal paths for AVs. Decictor comprises three main components: Non-invasive Mutation, Consistency Check, and Feedback. To overcome the oracle challenge, Non-invasive Mutation is devised to implement conservative modifications, ensuring the preservation of the original optimal path in the mutated scenarios. Subsequently, the Consistency Check is applied to determine the presence of non-optimal PPDs by comparing the driving paths in the original and mutated scenarios. To deal with the challenge of large environment space, we design Feedback metrics that integrate spatial and temporal dimensions of the AV's movement. These metrics are crucial for effectively steering the generation of NoDSs. We evaluate Decictor on Baidu Apollo, an open-source and production-grade ADS. The experimental results validate the effectiveness of Decictor in detecting non-optimal PPDs of ADSs.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
MoDitector: Module-Directed Testing for Autonomous Driving Systems
MoDitector generates collision scenarios that are caused by errors in a user-specified ADS module, reporting 55.3, 75.3, 71.7, and 14.3 module-induced critical scenarios for perception, prediction, planning, and contr...
-
Using Cooperative Co-evolutionary Search to Generate Metamorphic Test Cases for Autonomous Driving Systems
CoCoMEGA combines metamorphic testing with cooperative co-evolutionary search and finds more severe, diverse autonomous-driving safety violations in simulation than random search and a standard genetic algorithm.
-
Moral Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems
The paper formalizes four moral principles as metamorphic relations and uses simulation to reveal two apparent moral violations in a built-in ADS decision module.
-
DriveTester: A Unified Platform for Simulation-Based Autonomous Driving Testing
DriveTester integrates four advanced fuzzing tools into an Apollo-based testing platform and reports that the migrated tools still find collisions in two benchmark scenarios.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.