Towards Reliable AI: Adequacy Metrics for Ensuring the Quality of System-level Testing of Autonomous Vehicles
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
AI-powered systems have gained widespread popularity in various domains, including Autonomous Vehicles (AVs). However, ensuring their reliability and safety is challenging due to their complex nature. Conventional test adequacy metrics, designed to evaluate the effectiveness of traditional software testing, are often insufficient or impractical for these systems. White-box metrics, which are specifically designed for these systems, leverage neuron coverage information. These coverage metrics necessitate access to the underlying AI model and training data, which may not always be available. Furthermore, the existing adequacy metrics exhibit weak correlations with the ability to detect faults in the generated test suite, creating a gap that we aim to bridge in this study. In this paper, we introduce a set of black-box test adequacy metrics called "Test suite Instance Space Adequacy" (TISA) metrics, which can be used to gauge the effectiveness of a test suite. The TISA metrics offer a way to assess both the diversity and coverage of the test suite and the range of bugs detected during testing. Additionally, we introduce a framework that permits testers to visualise the diversity and coverage of the test suite in a two-dimensional space, facilitating the identification of areas that require improvement. We evaluate the efficacy of the TISA metrics by examining their correlation with the number of bugs detected in system-level simulation testing of AVs. A strong correlation, coupled with the short computation time, indicates their effectiveness and efficiency in estimating the adequacy of testing AVs.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 14 Nov 2023.
Builds on
No reference list yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 2.
5 papers.
- 2025Benchmarking Image Perturbations for Testing Automated Driving Assistance Systemscited by 4
- 2024Can Search-Based Testing with Pareto Optimization Effectively Cover Failure-Revealing Test Inputs?cited by 1
- 2024ARQ: A Mixed-Precision Quantization Framework for Accurate and Certifiably Robust DNNscited by 1
- 2026Real-World Perturbation Testing of Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 0
- 2026WM-Cov: Test Adequacy for Interactive World-Model-Style Autonomous Driving Simulationcited by 0
- 2026WM-Cov: Test Adequacy for Interactive World-Model-Style Autonomous Driving Simulation31 Jul 2026
- 2026Real-World Perturbation Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems6 Jul 2026
- 2025Benchmarking Image Perturbations for Testing Automated Driving Assistance Systems21 Jan 2025
- 2024ARQ: A Mixed-Precision Quantization Framework for Accurate and Certifiably Robust DNNs31 Oct 2024
- 2024Can Search-Based Testing with Pareto Optimization Effectively Cover Failure-Revealing Test Inputs?15 Oct 2024