Runtime Failure Hunting for Physics Engine Based Software Systems: How Far Can We Go?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Physics Engines (PEs) are fundamental software frameworks that simulate physical interactions in applications ranging from entertainment to safety-critical systems. Despite their importance, PEs suffer from physics failures, deviations from expected physical behaviors that can compromise software reliability, degrade user experience, and potentially cause critical failures in autonomous vehicles or medical robotics. Current testing approaches for PE-based software are inadequate, typically requiring white-box access and focusing on crash detection rather than semantically complex physics failures. This paper presents the first large-scale empirical study characterizing physics failures in PE-based software. We investigate three research questions addressing the manifestations of physics failures, the effectiveness of detection techniques, and developer perceptions of current detection practices. Our contributions include: (1) a taxonomy of physics failure manifestations; (2) a comprehensive evaluation of detection methods including deep learning, prompt-based techniques, and large multimodal models; and (3) actionable insights from developer experiences for improving detection approaches. To support future research, we release PhysiXFails, code, and other materials at https://sites.google.com/view/physics-failure-detection.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Jul 2025.
Builds on
17 of 43 references.
References · 17
- 2017AirSim: High-Fidelity Visual and Physical Simulation for Autonomous Vehiclescited by 523
- 2024VideoPhy: Evaluating Physical Commonsense for Video Generationcited by 228
- 2024VideoScore: Building Automatic Metrics to Simulate Fine-grained Human Feedback for Video Generationcited by 197
- 2024Towards World Simulator: Crafting Physical Commonsense-Based Benchmark for Video Generationcited by 174
- 2021MIST: Multiple Instance Self-Training Framework for Video Anomaly Detectioncited by 138
- 2024Evaluation of Text-to-Video Generation Models: A Dynamics Perspectivecited by 67
- 2024Holmes-VAD: Towards Unbiased and Explainable Video Anomaly Detection via Multi-modal LLMcited by 64
- 2021Augmenting Automated Game Testing with Deep Reinforcement Learningcited by 38
- 2023GlitchBench: Can large multimodal models detect video game glitches?cited by 23
- 2022CLIP meets GamePhysics: Towards bug identification in gameplay videos using zero-shot transfer learningcited by 15
- 2021GLIB: Towards Automated Test Oracle for Graphically-Rich Applicationscited by 9
- 2022Automatically Detecting Visual Bugs in HTML5 <canvas> Gamescited by 5
5 more
- 2023Modeling Software Quality in Virtual Reality Applications from User Feedbackcited by 4
- 20253D Software Synthesis Driven by Constraint-Expressive Intermediate Representationcited by 4
- 2024Less Cybersickness, Please: Demystifying and Detecting Stereoscopic Visual Inconsistencies in Virtual Reality Appscited by 3
- 2023PHYFU: Fuzzing Modern Physics Simulation Enginescited by 1
- 2024XRZoo: A Large-Scale and Versatile Dataset of Extended Reality (XR) Applicationscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Reliable LLM-Generated Programs for High-Energy Physics Experiments through Graph-Grounded Software Knowledge ↗
- 2024A Review of Nine Physics Engines for Reinforcement Learning Research
- 2025Towards Visual Discrimination and Reasoning of Real-World Physical Dynamics: Physics-Grounded Anomaly Detection
- 2026LabRobFail: A Benchmark for Robotic Failure Analysis in Chemical Self-driving Laboratory
- 2024Failure Prediction from Limited Hardware Demonstrations ↗
- 2026GUITAR: Structured Failure Diagnosis of GUI Agents via State Transitions
- 2026PhysCodeBench: Benchmarking Physics-Aware Symbolic Simulation of 3D Scenes via Self-Corrective Multi-Agent Refinement
- 2025From Physics to Machine Learning and Back: Part II - Learning and Observational Bias in PHM