Bridging the Gap between Real-world and Synthetic Images for Testing Autonomous Driving Systems
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) for Autonomous Driving Systems (ADS) are typically trained on real-world images and tested using synthetic simulator images. This approach results in training and test datasets with dissimilar distributions, which can potentially lead to erroneously decreased test accuracy. To address this issue, the literature suggests applying domain-to-domain translators to test datasets to bring them closer to the training datasets. However, translating images used for testing may unpredictably affect the reliability, effectiveness and efficiency of the testing process. Hence, this paper investigates the following questions in the context of ADS: Could translators reduce the effectiveness of images used for ADS-DNN testing and their ability to reveal faults in ADS-DNNs? Can translators result in excessive time overhead during simulation-based testing? To address these questions, we consider three domain-to-domain translators: CycleGAN and neural style transfer, from the literature, and SAEVAE, our proposed translator. Our results for two critical ADS tasks -- lane keeping and object detection -- indicate that translators significantly narrow the gap in ADS test accuracy caused by distribution dissimilarities between training and test data, with SAEVAE outperforming the other two translators. We show that, based on the recent diversity, coverage, and fault-revealing ability metrics for testing deep-learning systems, translators do not compromise the diversity and the coverage of test data, nor do they lead to revealing fewer faults in ADS-DNNs. Further, among the translators considered, SAEVAE incurs a negligible overhead in simulation time and can be efficiently integrated into simulation-based testing. Finally, we show that translators increase the correlation between offline and simulation-based testing results, which can help reduce the cost of simulation-based testing.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 32 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2024.
Builds on
32 of 67 references.
References · 32
- 2014Very Deep Convolutional Networks for Large-Scale Image Recognitioncited by 15,267
- 2016Image-to-Image Translation with Conditional Adversarial Networkscited by 4,510
- 2016Improved Techniques for Training GANscited by 2,938
- 2017CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulatorcited by 2,431
- 2017DeepXplore: Automated Whitebox Testing of Deep Learning Systemscited by 307
- 2017DeepTest: Automated Testing of Deep-Neural-Network-driven Autonomous Carscited by 249
- 2019Machine Learning Testing: Survey, Landscapes and Horizonscited by 213
- 2017Neural Style Transfer: A Reviewcited by 199
- 2017Deep Photo Style Transfercited by 168
- 2017Accelerated Hierarchical Density Clusteringcited by 100
- 2018How good is my GAN?cited by 74
- 2021Dual Contrastive Learning for Unsupervised Image-to-Image Translationcited by 65
20 more
- 2018On Offline Evaluation of Vision-based Driving Modelscited by 62
- 2019Misbehaviour Prediction for Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 55
- 2018DeepBillboard: Systematic Physical-World Testing of Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 50
- 2020Model-based Exploration of the Frontier of Behaviours for Deep Learning System Testingcited by 40
- 2021Mind the Gap! A Study on the Transferability of Virtual vs Physical-world Testing of Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 36
- 2022A Survey on Automated Driving System Testing: Landscapes and Trendscited by 36
- 2019Comparing Offline and Online Testing of Deep Neural Networks: An Autonomous Car Case Studycited by 27
- 2021Can Offline Testing of Deep Neural Networks Replace Their Online Testing?cited by 24
- 2021Distribution-Aware Testing of Neural Networks Using Generative Modelscited by 22
- 2021Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems: Where Are We and Where Should We Go?cited by 19
- 2022When and Why Test Generators for Deep Learning Produce Invalid Inputs: an Empirical Studycited by 18
- 2024Assessing Quality Metrics for Neural Reality Gap Input Mitigation in Autonomous Driving Testingcited by 15
- 2020Digital Twins Are Not Monozygotic -- Cross-Replicating ADAS Testing in Two Industry-Grade Automotive Simulatorscited by 12
- 2021YOLO-ReT: Towards High Accuracy Real-time Object Detection on Edge GPUscited by 12
- 2023Two is Better Than One: Digital Siblings to Improve Autonomous Driving Testingcited by 8
- 2022Sim2real for Autonomous Vehicle Control using Executable Digital Twincited by 7
- 2023Evaluating the Impact of Flaky Simulators on Testing Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 4
- 2023Reflections on Surrogate-Assisted Search-Based Testing: A Taxonomy and Two Replication Studies based on Industrial ADAS and Simulink Modelscited by 3
- 2023Supporting Safety Analysis of Image-processing DNNs through Clustering-based Approachescited by 2
- 2023GIST: Generated Inputs Sets Transferability in Deep Learningcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2025A Multi-Modality Evaluation of the Reality Gap in Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 1
- 2026CARD: A Multi-Modal Automotive Dataset for Dense 3D Reconstruction in Challenging Road Topographycited by 1
- 2025GAN-enhanced Simulation-driven DNN Testing in Absence of Ground Truthcited by 0
- 2025Effort-Optimized, Accuracy-Driven Labelling and Validation of Test Inputs for DL Systems: A Mixed-Integer Linear Programming Approachcited by 0
- 2026CARD: A Multi-Modal Automotive Dataset for Dense 3D Reconstruction in Challenging Road Topography6 May 2026
- 2025A Multi-Modality Evaluation of the Reality Gap in Autonomous Driving Systems26 Sep 2025
- 2025Effort-Optimized, Accuracy-Driven Labelling and Validation of Test Inputs for DL Systems: A Mixed-Integer Linear Programming Approach7 Jul 2025
- 2025GAN-enhanced Simulation-driven DNN Testing in Absence of Ground Truth20 Mar 2025