The emergence of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) has spurred research into testing the resilience of their perception systems, i.e., ensuring that they are not susceptible to critical misjudgements. It is important that these systems are tested not only with respect to other vehicles on the road, but also with respect to objects placed on the roadside. Trash bins, billboards, and greenery are examples of such objects, typically positioned according to guidelines developed for the human visual system, which may not align perfectly with the needs of AVs. Existing tests, however, usually focus on adversarial objects with conspicuous shapes or patches, which are ultimately unrealistic due to their unnatural appearance and reliance on white-box knowledge. In this work, we introduce a black-box attack on AV perception systems that creates realistic adversarial scenarios (i.e., satisfying road design guidelines) by manipulating the positions of common roadside objects and without resorting to "unnatural" adversarial patches. In particular, we propose TrashFuzz, a fuzzing algorithm that finds scenarios in which the placement of these objects leads to substantial AV misperceptions -- such as mistaking a traffic light's colour -- with the overall goal of causing traffic-law violations. To ensure realism, these scenarios must satisfy several rules encoding regulatory guidelines governing the placement of objects on public streets. We implemented and evaluated these attacks on the Apollo autonomous driving system, finding that TrashFuzz induced violations of 15 out of 24 traffic laws.

Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) are advancing rapidly, with Level-4 AVs already operating in real-world conditions. Current AVs, however, still lag behind human drivers in adaptability and performance, often exhibiting overly conservative behaviours and occasionally violating traffic laws. Existing solutions, such as runtime enforcement, mitigate this by automatically repairing the AV's planned trajectory at runtime, but such approaches lack transparency and should be a measure of last resort. It would be preferable for AV repairs to generalise beyond specific incidents and to be interpretable for users. In this work, we propose Fixdrive, a framework that analyses driving records from near-misses or law violations to generate AV driving strategy repairs that reduce the chance of such incidents occurring again. These repairs are captured in μDrive, a high-level domain-specific language for specifying driving behaviours in response to event-based triggers. Implemented for the state-of-the-art autonomous driving system Apollo, Fixdrive identifies and visualises critical moments from driving records, then uses a Multimodal Large Language Model (MLLM) with zero-shot learning to generate μDrive programs. We tested Fixdrive on various benchmark scenarios, and found that the generated repairs improved the AV's performance with respect to following traffic laws, avoiding collisions, and successfully reaching destinations. Furthermore, the direct costs of repairing an AV—15 minutes of offline analysis and $0.08 per violation-are reasonable in practice.

Autonomous driving systems (ADSs) integrate sensing, perception, drive control, and several other critical tasks in autonomous vehicles, motivating research into techniques for assessing their safety. While there are several approaches for testing and analysing them in high-fidelity simulators, ADSs may still encounter additional critical scenarios beyond those covered once they are deployed on real roads. An additional level of confidence can be established by monitoring and enforcing critical properties when the ADS is running. Existing work, however, is only able to monitor simple safety properties (e.g., avoidance of collisions) and is limited to blunt enforcement mechanisms such as hitting the emergency brakes. In this work, we propose REDriver, a general and modular approach to runtime enforcement, in which users can specify a broad range of properties (e.g., national traffic laws) in a specification language based on signal temporal logic (STL). REDriver monitors the planned trajectory of the ADS based on a quantitative semantics of STL, and uses a gradient-driven algorithm to repair the trajectory when a violation of the specification is likely. We implemented REDriver for two versions of Apollo (i.e., a popular ADS), and subjected it to a benchmark of violations of Chinese traffic laws. The results show that REDriver significantly improves Apollo's conformance to the specification with minimal overhead.

The rapid progress of autonomous vehicles (AVs) has brought the prospect of a driverless future closer than ever. Recent fatalities, however, have emphasized the importance of safety validation through large-scale testing. Multiple approaches achieve this fully automatically using high-fidelity simulators, i.e., by generating diverse driving scenarios and evaluating autonomous driving systems (ADSs) against different test oracles. While effective at finding violations, these approaches do not identify the decisions and actions that caused them---information that is critical for improving the safety of ADSs. To address this challenge, we propose ACAV, an automated framework designed to conduct causality analyses for AV accident recordings in two stages. First, we apply feature extraction schemas based on the messages exchanged between ADS modules, and use a weighted voting method to discard frames of the recording unrelated to the accident. Second, we use safety specifications to identify safety-critical frames and deduce causal events by applying CAT---our causal analysis tool---to a station-time graph. We evaluated ACAV on the Apollo ADS, finding that it can identify five distinct types of causal events in 93.64% of 110 accident recordings generated by an AV testing engine. We further evaluated ACAV on 1206 accident recordings collected from versions of Apollo injected with specific faults, finding that it can correctly identify causal events in 96.44% of the accidents triggered by prediction errors, and 85.73% of the accidents triggered by planning errors.

An automated driving system (ADS), as the brain of an autonomous vehicle (AV), should be tested thoroughly ahead of deployment. ADS must satisfy a complex set of rules to ensure road safety, e.g., the existing traffic laws and possibly future laws that are dedicated to AVs. To comprehensively test an ADS, we would like to systematically discover diverse scenarios in which certain traffic law is violated. The challenge is that (1) there are many traffic laws (e.g., 13 testable articles in Chinese traffic laws and 16 testable articles in Singapore traffic laws, with 81 and 43 violation situations respectively); and (2) many of traffic laws are only relevant in complicated specific scenarios.

Autonomous vehicle (AV) systems must be comprehensively tested and evaluated before they can be deployed. High-fidelity simulators such as CARLA or LGSVL allow this to be done safely in very realistic and highly customizable environments. Existing testing approaches, however, fail to test simulated AVs systematically, as they focus on specific scenarios and oracles (e.g., lane following scenario with the “no collision” requirement) and lack any coverage criteria measures. In this paper, we propose$\mathtt {AVUnit}$, a framework for systematically testing AV systems against customizable correctness specifications. Designed modularly to support different simulators,$\mathtt {AVUnit}$consists of two new languages for specifying dynamic properties of scenes (e.g. changing pedestrian behaviour after waypoints) and fine-grained assertions about the AV's journey.$\mathtt {AVUnit}$further supports multiple fuzzing algorithms that automatically search for test cases that violate these assertions, using robustness and coverage measures as fitness metrics. We evaluated the implementation of$\mathtt {AVUnit}$for the LGSVL+Apollo simulation environment, finding 19 kinds of issues in Apollo, which indicate that the open-source Apollo does not perform well in complex intersections and lane-changing related scenarios.

Autonomous driving systems (ADSs) must be tested thoroughly before they can be deployed in autonomous vehicles. High-fidelity simulators allow them to be tested against diverse scenarios, including those that are difficult to recreate in real-world testing grounds. While previous approaches have shown that test cases can be generated automatically, they tend to focus on weak oracles (e.g. reaching the destination without collisions) without assessing whether the journey itself was undertaken safely and satisfied the law. In this work, we propose , an automated framework for testing ADSs against real-world traffic laws, which is designed to be compatible with different scenario description languages. provides a rich driver-oriented specification language for describing traffic laws, and a fuzzing engine that searches for different ways of violating them by maximising specification coverage. To evaluate our approach, we implemented it for Apollo+LGSVL and specified the traffic laws of China. was able to find 14 violations of these laws, including 173 test cases that caused accidents.