# Improving AEBS Validation Through Objective Intervention Classification Leveraging the Prediction Divergence Principle

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.07872 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.07872/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 5 of its 41 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Jul 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 5 of 5)

- [The highD Dataset: A Drone Dataset of Naturalistic Vehicle Trajectories on German Highways for Validation of Highly Automated Driving Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.05642/) (2018)
- [The inD Dataset: A Drone Dataset of Naturalistic Road User Trajectories at German Intersections](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1911.07602/) (2019)
- [Mind the Gap! A Study on the Transferability of Virtual vs Physical-world Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.11255/) (2021)
- [A Survey on Automated Driving System Testing: Landscapes and Trends](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.05961/) (2022)
- [Criticality Metrics for Automated Driving: A Review and Suitability Analysis of the State of the Art](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.02403/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The safety validation of automatic emergency braking system (AEBS) requires accurately distinguishing between false positive (FP) and true positive (TP) system activations. While simulations allow straightforward differentiation by comparing scenarios with and without interventions, analyzing activations from open-loop resimulations - such as those from field operational testing (FOT) - is more complex. This complexity arises from scenario parameter uncertainty and the influence of driver interventions in the recorded data. Human labeling is frequently used to address these challenges, relying on subjective assessments of intervention necessity or situational criticality, potentially introducing biases and limitations. This work proposes a rule-based classification approach leveraging the Prediction Divergence Principle (PDP) to address those issues. Applied to a simplified AEBS, the proposed method reveals key strengths, limitations, and system requirements for effective implementation. The findings suggest that combining this approach with human labeling may enhance the transparency and consistency of classification, thereby improving the overall validation process. While the rule set for classification derived in this work adopts a conservative approach, the paper outlines future directions for refinement and broader applicability. Finally, this work highlights the potential of such methods to complement existing practices, paving the way for more reliable and reproducible AEBS validation frameworks.