mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Can Offline Testing of Deep Neural Networks Replace Their Online Testing?

arXiv 2101.11118 ↗First posted 26 Jan 2021cs.SE cs.LGcited by 24

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

We distinguish two general modes of testing for Deep Neural Networks (DNNs): Offline testing where DNNs are tested as individual units based on test datasets obtained without involving the DNNs under test, and online testing where DNNs are embedded into a specific application environment and tested in a closed-loop mode in interaction with the application environment. Typically, DNNs are subjected to both types of testing during their development life cycle where offline testing is applied immediately after DNN training and online testing follows after offline testing and once a DNN is deployed within a specific application environment. In this paper, we study the relationship between offline and online testing. Our goal is to determine how offline testing and online testing differ or complement one another and if offline testing results can be used to help reduce the cost of online testing? Though these questions are generally relevant to all autonomous systems, we study them in the context of automated driving systems where, as study subjects, we use DNNs automating end-to-end controls of steering functions of self-driving vehicles. Our results show that offline testing is less effective than online testing as many safety violations identified by online testing could not be identified by offline testing, while large prediction errors generated by offline testing always led to severe safety violations detectable by online testing. Further, we cannot exploit offline testing results to reduce the cost of online testing in practice since we are not able to identify specific situations where offline testing could be as accurate as online testing in identifying safety requirement violations.

Key facts. Cited by 24 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jan 2021.

Builds on

16 of 43 references.

References · 16

  1. 2014Sequence to Sequence Learning with Neural Networkscited by 2,986
  2. 2017CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulatorcited by 2,449
  3. 2017AirSim: High-Fidelity Visual and Physical Simulation for Autonomous Vehiclescited by 523
  4. 2017DeepXplore: Automated Whitebox Testing of Deep Learning Systemscited by 311
  5. 2017DeepTest: Automated Testing of Deep-Neural-Network-driven Autonomous Carscited by 251
  6. 2019Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizonscited by 218
  7. 2018DeepGauge: Multi-Granularity Testing Criteria for Deep Learning Systemscited by 147
  8. 2018Guiding Deep Learning System Testing using Surprise Adequacycited by 124
  9. 2020LGSVL Simulator: A High Fidelity Simulator for Autonomous Drivingcited by 121
  10. 2018On Offline Evaluation of Vision-based Driving Modelscited by 64
  11. 2018DeepBillboard: Systematic Physical-World Testing of Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 50
  12. 2017Feature-Guided Black-Box Safety Testing of Deep Neural Networkscited by 49
4 more
  1. 2018Simulation-based Adversarial Test Generation for Autonomous Vehicles with Machine Learning Componentscited by 29
  2. 2019Comparing Offline and Online Testing of Deep Neural Networks: An Autonomous Car Case Studycited by 27
  3. 2017Systematic Testing of Convolutional Neural Networks for Autonomous Drivingcited by 5
  4. 2019Paracosm: A Language and Tool for Testing Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2022: 6; 2023: 8; 2024: 2; 2025: 6; 2026: 2.

24 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2022Many-Objective Reinforcement Learning for Online Testing of DNN-Enabled Systemscited by 19
  2. 2022Ergo, SMIRK is Safe: A Safety Case for a Machine Learning Component in a Pedestrian Automatic Emergency Brake Systemcited by 14
  3. 2023On Offline Evaluation of 3D Object Detection for Autonomous Drivingcited by 11
  4. 2023Adv3D: Generating Safety-Critical 3D Objects through Closed-Loop Simulationcited by 10
  5. 2023Two is Better Than One: Digital Siblings to Improve Autonomous Driving Testingcited by 9
  6. 2023Boundary State Generation for Testing and Improvement of Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 6
  7. 2022Machine Learning Testing in an ADAS Case Study Using Simulation-Integrated Bio-Inspired Search-Based Testingcited by 4
  8. 2022Simulator-based explanation and debugging of hazard-triggering events in DNN-based safety-critical systemscited by 4
  9. 2023Evaluating the Impact of Flaky Simulators on Testing Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 4
  10. 2024Bridging the Gap between Real-world and Synthetic Images for Testing Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 4
  11. 2025Benchmarking Image Perturbations for Testing Automated Driving Assistance Systemscited by 4
  12. 2022Uncertainty Quantification for Deep Neural Networks: An Empirical Comparison and Usage Guidelinescited by 3
12 more
  1. 2023Supporting Safety Analysis of Image-processing DNNs through Clustering-based Approachescited by 2
  2. 2023Identifying the Hazard Boundary of ML-enabled Autonomous Systems Using Cooperative Co-Evolutionary Searchcited by 2
  3. 2023Combating the effects of speed and delays in end-to-end self-drivingcited by 2
  4. 2024Instance-Level Safety-Aware Fidelity of Synthetic Data and Its Calibrationcited by 2
  5. 2025Simulator Ensembles for Trustworthy Autonomous Driving Systems Testingcited by 1
  6. 2025A Multi-Modality Evaluation of the Reality Gap in Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 1
  7. 2025Quantifying Fidelity: A Decisive Feature Approach to Comparing Synthetic and Real Imagerycited by 1
  8. 2022Learning Failure-Inducing Models for Testing Software-Defined Networkscited by 0
  9. 2025When Autonomous Vehicle Meets V2X Cooperative Perception: How Far Are We?cited by 0
  10. 2025PEOAT: Personalization-Guided Evolutionary Question Assembly for One-Shot Adaptive Testingcited by 0
  11. 2026Real-World Perturbation Testing of Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 0
  12. 2026SimVerity: When Does Simulated Agent Success Survive Physical Deployment?cited by 0