Autonomous Driving Safety Evaluation

Validating Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) requires exposure to rare, safety-critical scenarios, infrequent in routine driving data. Existing benchmarks address this by generating synthetic conflicts or mapping accident descriptions to abstract road geometries, failing to capture the topological complexity of real-world crashes. We introduce TRACE , a pipeline that automates the reconstruction of NHTSA crash reports into high-fidelity CARLA simulations by (1) retrieving site-specific OpenStreetMap data to preserve exact road topology, (2) leveraging Large Language Models to infer vehicles' initial state from road geometry and pre-crash maneuvers, and (3) generating simulation trajectories from semi-structured report data. Using this pipeline, we curated a benchmark of 52 diverse accident scenarios covering varied collision types, road topologies, and pre-crash maneuvers, providing a challenging open source resource for testing AV systems against real-world failures.

Safety and security are essential for the admission and acceptance of automated and autonomous vehicles. Deep neural networks (DNNs) are widely used for perception and further components of the autonomous driving (AD) stack. However, they possess several limitations, including lack of generalization, efficiency, explainability, plausibility, and robustness. These insufficiencies can pose significant risks to autonomous driving systems. However, hazards, threats, and risks associated with DNN limitations in this domain have not been systematically studied so far. In this work, we propose a joint workflow for risk assessment combining the hazard analysis and risk assessment (HARA) following ISO 26262 and threat analysis and risk assessment (TARA) following the ISO/SAE 21434 to identify and analyze risks arising from inherent DNN limitations in AD perception.

Simulation-based testing of autonomous driving systems (ADS) must uncover realistic and diverse failures in dense, heterogeneous traffic. However, existing search-based seeding methods (e.g., genetic algorithms) struggle in high-dimensional spaces, often collapsing to limited modes and missing many failure scenarios. We present PtoP, a framework that combines adaptive random seed generation with Stein Variational Gradient Descent (SVGD) to produce diverse, failure-inducing initial conditions. SVGD balances attraction toward high-risk regions and repulsion among particles, yielding risk-seeking yet well-distributed seeds across multiple failure modes. PtoP is plug-and-play and enhances existing online testing methods (e.g., reinforcement learning--based testers) by providing principled seeds. Evaluation in CARLA on two industry-grade ADS (Apollo, Autoware) and a native end-to-end system shows that PtoP improves safety violation rate (up to 27.68%), scenario diversity (9.6%), and map coverage (16.78%) over baselines.

Most autonomous driving safety benchmarks use time-to-collision (TTC) to assess risk and guide safe behaviour. However, TTC-based methods treat risk as a one-dimensional closing problem, despite the inherently two-dimensional nature of collision avoidance, and therefore cannot faithfully capture risk or its evolution over time. Here, we report evasive acceleration (EA), a hyperparameter-free and physically interpretable two-dimensional paradigm for risk quantification. By evaluating all possible directions of collision avoidance, EA defines risk as the minimum magnitude of a constant relative acceleration vector required to alter the relative motion and make the interaction collision-free. Using interaction data from five open datasets and more than 600 real crashes, we derive percentile-based warning thresholds and show that EA provides the earliest statistically significant warning across all thresholds. Moreover, EA provides the best discrimination of eventual collision outcomes and improves information retention by 54.2-241.4% over all compared baselines. Adding EA to existing methods yields 17.5-95.5 times more information gain than adding existing methods to EA, indicating that EA captures much of the outcome-relevant information in existing methods while contributing substantial additional nonredundant information. Overall, EA better captures the structure of collision risk and provides a foundation for next-generation autonomous driving systems.

Rapid advances in vision-language models (VLMs) have generated growing interest in their application to autonomous driving. A prevailing assumption is that successive VLM generations will continually improve driving performance and eventually outperform state-of-the-art methods. To systematically examine this assumption, we introduce LightEMMA, a longitudinal framework for evaluating the autonomous driving performance of VLMs. LightEMMA uses a lightweight, unified evaluation protocol that assesses each model's intrinsic driving capability without model-specific fine-tuning, architectural changes, or prompt engineering. Using this protocol, we evaluate 15 models from five major families on the challenging nuScenes prediction benchmark. Empirical findings show that, despite increased model scale and enhanced general reasoning capabilities, successive VLM generations do not consistently achieve better driving performance. Further analysis of driving scenarios reveals recurring failure modes, including overreliance on historical actions and difficulty reconciling conflicting visual cues. These findings highlight the need for domain-specific adaptation to improve the safety of VLM-based autonomous driving systems. The source code is available at https://github.com/michigan-traffic-lab/LightEMMA.