Paper detail

Pass-Fail Criteria for Scenario-Based Testing of Automated Driving Systems

The MUSICC project has created a proof-of-concept scenario database to be used as part of a type approval process for the verification of automated driving systems (ADS). This process must include a highly automated means of evaluating test results, as manual review at the scale required is impractical. This paper sets out a framework for assessing an ADS's behavioural safety in normal operation (i.e. performance of the dynamic driving task without component failures or malicious actions). Five top-level evaluation criteria for ADS performance are identified. Implementing these requires two types of outcome scoring rule: prescriptive (measurable rules which must always be followed) and risk-based (undesirable outcomes which must not occur too often). Scoring rules are defined in a programming language and will be stored as part of the scenario description. Risk-based rules cannot give a pass/fail decision from a single test case. Instead, a framework is defined to reach a decision for each functional scenario (set of test cases with common features). This considers statistical performance across many individual tests. Implications of this framework for hypothesis testing and scenario selection are identified.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.