A Data-driven Control Policy based Driving Safety Analysis System for Autonomous Vehicles
Abstract
An autonomous vehicle (AV) is a combination of subsystems, measuring its driving environments with different sensors (e.g., camera, RADAR, and LiDAR) in real time. AVs follow their control policies and make real-time control decisions based on sensor measurements to ensure driving safety. Control policies in an AV are usually implemented with codes and not open to the public and drivers, which results in people’s strong concerns about driving safety. In this article, we propose a data-driven control policy-based driving safety analysis system (PoSa) to analyze the driving safety of a target AV. In PoSa, we first build a data-driven control policy extraction method to extract control policies of a target AV based on its historical driving data. Then, we develop a hazard driving scenario identification method to identify possible hazard driving scenarios of a target AV by executing the extracted control policies under different driving scenarios. Finally, we use vehicle driving data from one industry-standard AV platform (Baidu Apollo) to evaluate PoSa’s hazard driving scenario identification performance. We compared its identification results with Baidu AV accident reports from California DMV and the hazard driving scenario identification results cover as many as 89% hazard driving scenarios in the Baidu AV accident report, which demonstrates that PoSa has good performance on identifying hazard driving scenarios and its identification results can be used to optimize control po…
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?
Research analyzing the level of impact on the driving safety of AVs by ODD is still insufficient.
“However, several studies have been published on the performance of ADS-mounted sensors, but research analyzing the level of impact on the driving safety of AVs by ODD is still insufficient [16][17][18][19].”
From Evaluation of Autonomous Driving Safety by Operational Design Domains (ODD) in Mixed Traffic (2024) · cites this paper as [19]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Evaluation of Autonomous Driving Safety by Operational Design Domains (ODD) in Mixed Traffic
Kim, H., Ko, J., Oh, C., & Kim, S. (2024) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su16229672 · Cited by 18 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kang, L., Shen, H., Li, Y., & Xu, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Virginia (US)
- Clemson University (US)
- Xi'an University of Architecture and Technology (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Internet of Things Journal
- Published
- 2023-08-15
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 14058-14070
- ISSN
- 2327-4662 (ISSN-L)
- 2372-2541
- OpenAlex
- W4321021081
- Cited by
- 12
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7
- FWCI
- 0.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Internet of Things Journal (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- U.S. NSF (NSF-1827674, NSF-1822965)
- Federal Highway Administration (693JJ31950016)
- Microsoft Research Faculty Fellowship (8300751)
- Commonwealth Cyber Initiative (CCI), an Investment in the Advancement of Cyber Research, Innovation and Workforce Development
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (52002309)
- Natural Science Foundation Project of Shaanxi Province (2020JQ-669)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Automotive Engineering › Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Safety Systems Engineering in Autonomy
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Keywords
- autonomous vehicles, driving safety, vehicle driving data, Baidu Apollo, accident reports
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