Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Naveen Mohan
dblp:183/2055
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2023
0000-0001-9314-545XORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 1 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1Software engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Software testing · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Autonomous driving · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Robotics › Autonomous driving
safety validation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Finding Critical Scenarios for Automated Driving Systems: A Systematic Mapping Study · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2023 |
Software testing › test process › test design
critical scenario identification |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Finding Critical Scenarios for Automated Driving Systems: A Systematic Mapping Study · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2023 |
Software testing › specification-based testing › requirements-based testing
scenario-based testing |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Finding Critical Scenarios for Automated Driving Systems: A Systematic Mapping Study · IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 2023 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
systematic mapping study · 1.3
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Finding Critical Scenarios for Automated Driving Systems: A Systematic Mapping StudyabstractScenario-based approaches have been receiving a huge amount of attention in research and engineering of automated driving systems. Due to the complexity and uncertainty of the driving environment, and the complexity of the driving task itself, the number of possible driving scenarios that an Automated Driving System or Advanced Driving-Assistance System may encounter is virtually infinite. Therefore it is essential to be able to reason about the identification of scenarios and in particular critical ones that may impose unacceptable risk if not considered. Critical scenarios are particularly important to support design, verification and validation efforts, and as a basis for a safety case. In this paper, we present the results of a systematic mapping study in the context of autonomous driving. The main contributions are: (i) introducing a comprehensive taxonomy for critical scenario identification methods; (ii) giving an overview of the state-of-the-art research based on the taxonomy encompassing 86 papers between 2017 and 2020; and (iii) identifying open issues and directions for further research. The provided taxonomy comprises three main perspectives encompassing the problem definition (the why), the solution (the methods to derive scenarios), and the assessment of the established scenarios. In addition, we discuss open research issues considering the perspectives of coverage, practicability, and scenario space explosion. Xinhai Zhang, Jianbo Tao, Kaige Tan, Martin Törngren, José Manuel Gaspar Sánchez, Muhammad Rusyadi Ramli, Xin Tao 0003, Magnus Gyllenhammar, Franz Wotawa, Naveen Mohan, Mihai Nica, Hermann Felbinger |
IEEE Trans. Software Eng. | 10 |
| 2021 | Programmable Systems for Intelligence in Automobiles (PRYSTINE): Final results after Year 3abstractAutonomous driving is disrupting the automotive industry as we know it today. For this, fail-operational behavior is essential in the sense, plan, and act stages of the automation chain in order to handle safety-critical situations on its own, which currently is not reached with state-of-the-art approaches.The European ECSEL research project PRYSTINE realizes Fail-operational Urban Surround perceptION (FUSION) based on robust Radar and LiDAR sensor fusion and control functions in order to enable safe automated driving in urban and rural environments. This paper showcases some of the key exploitable results (e.g., novel Radar sensors, innovative embedded control and E/E architectures, pioneering sensor fusion approaches, AI-controlled vehicle demonstrators) achieved until its final year 3. Norbert Druml, Anna Ryabokon, Rupert Schorn, Jochen Koszescha, Kaspars Ozols, Aleksandrs Levinskis, Rihards Novickis, Ethiopia Nigussie, Jouni Isoaho, Selim Solmaz, Georg Stettinger, Sergio E. Diaz, Mauricio Marcano, Jorge Villagra, Juan Medina, Martina Schwarz, Antonio Artuñedo, Mauro Comi, Rutger Beekelaar, Onur Özçelik, Elif Aksu Tasdelen, Yesim Gürbüz, Jan Saijets, Jukka Kyynäräinen, Dmitry Morits, Björn Debaillie, Maxim Rykunov, Joan Escamilla, Jarno Vanne, Tomi Korhonen, Kalle Holma, Eva-Maria Matzhold, Carlo Novara, Fabio Tango, Paolo Burgio, Giuseppe Carlo Calafiore, Milad Karimshoushtari, Emilie Boulay, Miguel Dhaens, Kylian Praet, Han Zwijnenberg, Henri Palm, David Aledo Ortega, Ercan Kalali, Tuomas Pensala, Arto Kyytinen, Morten Larsen, Omar Veledar, Georg Macher, Michael Lafer, Lorenzo Giraudi, Jakob Reckenzaun, Daniel Hammer, Naveen Mohan, Josef Schmid, Alfred Höß, Shai Ophir, Anand Dubey, Jonas Fuchs, Maximilian Lübke, Andrei Anghel, Nicolae-Catalin Ristea, Martin Törngren, Alua Musralina, Marlene Harter, Joseena Memadathil Jose, George Dimitrakopoulos 0001 |
DSD | 54 |
| 2020 | Programmable Systems for Intelligence in Automobiles (PRYSTINE): Technical Progress after Year 2abstractAutonomous driving has the potential to disruptively change the automotive industry as we know it today. For this, fail-operational behavior is essential in the sense, plan, and act stages of the automation chain in order to handle safety-critical situations by its own, which currently is not reached with state-of-the-art approaches.The European ECSEL research project PRYSTINE realizes Fail-operational Urban Surround perceptION (FUSION) based on robust Radar and LiDAR sensor fusion and control functions in order to enable safe automated driving in urban and rural environments. This paper showcases some of the key results (e.g., novel Radar sensors, innovative embedded control and E/E architectures, pioneering sensor fusion approaches, AI controlled vehicle demonstrators) achieved until year 2. Norbert Druml, Björn Debaillie, Andrei Anghel, Nicolae-Catalin Ristea, Jonas Fuchs, Anand Dubey, Torsten Reissland, Maike Hartstem, Viktor Rack, Anna Ryabokon, Kaspars Ozols, Rihards Novickis, Aleksandrs Levinskis, Omar Veledar, Georg Macher, Johannes Jany-Luig, Selim Solmaz, Jakob Reckenzaun, Naveen Mohan, Shai Ophir, Georg Stettinger, Sergio E. Diaz, Mauricio Marcano, Jorge Villagra, Andrea Castellano, Rutger Beekelaar, Fabio Tango, Jarno Vanne, Kalle Holma, Oguz Icoglu, George Dimitrakopoulos 0001 |
DSD | 19 |
| 2018 | Safe Stop Trajectory Planning for Highly Automated Vehicles: An Optimal Control Problem FormulationabstractHighly automated road vehicles need the capability of stopping safely in a situation that disrupts continued normal operation, e.g. due to internal system faults. Motion planning for safe stop differs from nominal motion planning, since there is not a specific goal location. Rather, the desired behavior is that the vehicle should reach a stopped state, preferably outside of active lanes. Also, the functionality to stop safely needs to be of high integrity. The first contribution of this paper is to formulate the safe stop problem as a benchmark optimal control problem, which can be solved by dynamic programming. However, this solution method cannot be used in real-time. The second contribution is to develop a real-time safe stop trajectory planning algorithm, based on selection from a precomputed set of trajectories. By exploiting the particular properties of the safe stop problem, the cardinality of the set is decreased, making the algorithm computationally efficient. Furthermore, a monitoring based architecture concept is proposed, that ensures dependability of the safe stop function. Finally, a proof of concept simulation using the proposed architecture and the safe stop trajectory planner is presented. Lars J. Svensson, Lola Masson, Naveen Mohan, Erik Ward, Anna Pernestål Brenden, Lei Feng 0002, Martin Törngren |
Intelligent Vehicles Symposium | 3 |