Real-World Perturbation Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems

Robustness is a critical requirement for deploying autonomous driving systems in the real world. Existing robustness benchmarks for autonomous driving have made important progress in studying the effects of image-level corruptions, such as adverse weather or camera degradation, on perception modules and open-loop planning outputs. However, deployment can also involve system-level imperfections, such as inference latency and ego-state estimation errors, which remain less studied in closed-loop E2E-AD evaluation. These imperfections can accumulate through the feedback loop and destabilize control. In this work, we present Bench2Drive-Robust, to our knowledge the first device-centric robustness benchmark for closed-loop end-to-end autonomous driving under realistic deployment perturbations. We systematically evaluate deployment-oriented perturbations arising from three major sources: camera-stream failures (frame drop, partial observation), ego-state estimation errors (GPS noise, and speed or odometry errors), and compute-induced control delay (model inference delay). We evaluate representative end-to-end driving methods and analyze their robustness under different perturbation severities. Our results show that these deployment-related perturbations can substantially degrade closed-loop driving performance, revealing robustness challenges that are not fully captured by conventional image-level corruption evaluations. By establishing a closed-loop evaluation protocol and demonstrating the substantial impact of these deployment-oriented perturbations, Bench2Drive-Robust defines practical robustness problems for end-to-end autonomous driving and encourages further research on deployment-aware robust driving systems.

Environmental illusions (eg., shadows, reflections, and tire marks) are naturally existing yet overlooked phenomena in real-world driving environments. They can disturb visual perception, leading to misinterpretation of the scene and posing serious safety risks to autonomous driving (AD) systems. However, existing researches largely overlook these phenomena, leaving a critical gap. To address this issue, we study AD robustness through the lane perception perspective, a fundamental task supporting core functions like cruise control and lane centering. We focus on two representative models: conventional lane detection (LD) and vision-language model-based systems (ADVLMs). In this work, we introduce the first benchmark, LanEvil++, for evaluating the robustness of lane perception under environmental illusions. LanEvil++ encompasses 14 types of illusions and leverages the CARLA simulator to generate 94 high-fidelity, fully controllable 3D scenes, yielding a dataset of 90,292 annotated images, 1,596 video clips, and 41,855 visual question answering pairs. Extensive evaluations demonstrate that environmental illusions substantially degrade the performance of state-of-the-art LD methods. On average, LD models experience a 5.27% drop in Accuracy and a 10.49% decline in F1-score, while ADVLMs show a 2.03% reduction in GPT-score and a 0.75% drop in Language-score. Among all illusions, shadows emerge as the most disruptive factor, reducing accuracy by up to 7.20%. Furthermore, closed-loop simulations reveal that these illusions can lead to incorrect driving decisions. Complementary real-world case studies highlight safety-critical failures in actual traffic scenes. To enhance robustness, we propose the Multimodal Illusion Defense Approach (MIDA). MIDA achieves substantial gains under challenging conditions, boosting robustness by 4.23% on LD models and 3.82% on ADVLMs.

Autonomous driving perception is typically evaluated on clean benchmark data, yet real-world deployment requires robustness to rare, structured, and potentially adversarial sensor anomalies. This gap is especially critical for LiDAR, where external actors can physically manipulate the sensing process to induce black-box perception failures without accessing the model. Existing LiDAR benchmarks provide little visibility into this failure mode. Prior adversarial LiDAR studies have largely centered on attack hardware, geometric and algorithmic defenses, and early-generation detectors, leaving the robustness of modern perception systems unexplored. To address this evaluation gap, we introduce ATLAS (Adversarial Temporal LiDAR Attack Suite), the first large-scale, physically grounded evaluation benchmark for LiDAR perception models under black-box sensor attacks, simulating the two primary attack modes -- point injection and point removal -- across real driving sequences. Evaluating a broad cross-section of current state-of-the-art LiDAR perception models, ATLAS reveals a surprising robustness asymmetry: models with stronger performance on standard benchmarks tend to better withstand removal attacks, yet are actually more vulnerable to injection attacks than weaker models. We trace this vulnerability to standard object database sampling augmentations, revealing how current training practices can induce architecture-agnostic robustness failures, and study initial directions for mitigating both attack modes. We release the ATLAS generation code to support extensible, reproducible evaluations as attack capabilities evolve, helping make black-box sensor robustness an explicit consideration in future LiDAR perception development.