mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Reinforcement Learning for Testing Interdependent Requirements in Autonomous Vehicles: An Empirical Study

arXiv 2502.15792 ↗First posted 18 Feb 2025cs.SE cs.LG cs.ROcited by 2

On the map: End-to-end autonomous driving → Reinforcement learning for driving

Abstract (arXiv)

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) make driving decisions without humans, making dependability assurance critical. Scenario-based testing is widely used to evaluate AVs under diverse conditions, with reinforcement learning (RL) generating test scenarios that identify violations of functional and safety requirements. Many requirements are interdependent and involve trade-offs, making it unclear whether single-objective RL (SORL), which combines objectives into a single reward, can reliably reveal violations or whether multi-objective RL (MORL), which explicitly considers multiple objectives, is necessary. We present an empirical evaluation comparing SORL and MORL for generating critical scenarios that simultaneously test interdependent requirements using an end-to-end AV controller and high-fidelity simulator. Results suggest that MORL and SORL differ mainly in how violations occur, while showing comparable effectiveness in many cases. MORL tends to generate more requirement-violation scenarios, whereas SORL produces higher-severity violations. Their relative performance also depends on specific objective combinations and, to a lesser extent, road conditions. Regarding diversity, MORL consistently covers a broader range of scenarios. Thus, MORL is preferable when scenario diversity and coverage are prioritized, whereas SORL may better expose severe violations. Our empirical evaluation addresses a gap by systematically comparing SORL and MORL, highlighting the importance of requirement dependencies in RL-based AV testing.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reinforcement learning for driving, one of 9 directions in End-to-end autonomous driving. Builds on 3 of its 75 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Feb 2025.

Builds on

3 of 75 references.

References · 3

  1. 2015Prioritized Experience Replaycited by 1,070
  2. 2015Incentivizing Exploration In Reinforcement Learning With Deep Predictive Modelscited by 154
  3. 2021Criticality Metrics for Automated Driving: A Review and Suitability Analysis of the State of the Artcited by 30

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Generating Critical Scenarios for Testing Automated Driving Systems
  2. 2024Reinforcement Learning for Online Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems: a Replication and Extension Study
  3. 2023(Re)2H2O: Autonomous Driving Scenario Generation via Reversely Regularized Hybrid Offline-and-Online Reinforcement Learning
  4. 2021Multi-Agent Vulnerability Discovery for Autonomous Driving with Hazard Arbitration Reward
  5. 2025MARL-OT: Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning Guided Online Fuzzing to Detect Safety Violation in Autonomous Driving Systems
  6. 2025Scenario-Based Hierarchical Reinforcement Learning for Automated Driving Decision Making
  7. 2025Evaluating Scenario-based Decision-making for Interactive Autonomous Driving Using Rational Criteria: A Survey
  8. 2023Safety-aware Causal Representation for Trustworthy Offline Reinforcement Learning in Autonomous Driving