mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

ROMAN: Reward-Orchestrated Multi-Head Attention Network for Autonomous Driving System Testing

arXiv 2602.05629 ↗First posted 5 Feb 2026cs.SE cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Automated Driving System (ADS) acts as the brain of autonomous vehicles, responsible for their safety and efficiency. Safe deployment requires thorough testing in diverse real-world scenarios and compliance with traffic laws like speed limits, signal obedience, and right-of-way rules. Violations like running red lights or speeding pose severe safety risks. However, current testing approaches face significant challenges: limited ability to generate complex and high-risk law-breaking scenarios, and failing to account for complex interactions involving multiple vehicles and critical situations. To address these challenges, we propose ROMAN, a novel scenario generation approach for ADS testing that combines a multi-head attention network with a traffic law weighting mechanism. ROMAN is designed to generate high-risk violation scenarios to enable more thorough and targeted ADS evaluation. The multi-head attention mechanism models interactions among vehicles, traffic signals, and other factors. The traffic law weighting mechanism implements a workflow that leverages an LLM-based risk weighting module to evaluate violations based on the two dimensions of severity and occurrence. We have evaluated ROMAN by testing the Baidu Apollo ADS within the CARLA simulation platform and conducting extensive experiments to measure its performance. Experimental results demonstrate that ROMAN surpassed state-of-the-art tools ABLE and LawBreaker by achieving 7.91% higher average violation count than ABLE and 55.96% higher than LawBreaker, while also maintaining greater scenario diversity. In addition, only ROMAN successfully generated violation scenarios for every clause of the input traffic laws, enabling it to identify more high-risk violations than existing approaches.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Feb 2026.

Builds on

16 of 38 references.

References · 16

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2017CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulatorcited by 2,449
  3. 2015A Diversity-Promoting Objective Function for Neural Conversation Modelscited by 1,077
  4. 2021Flow Network based Generative Models for Non-Iterative Diverse Candidate Generationcited by 392
  5. 2019Self-Driving Cars: A Surveycited by 148
  6. 2020LGSVL Simulator: A High Fidelity Simulator for Autonomous Drivingcited by 121
  7. 2021Multi-modal Motion Prediction with Transformer-based Neural Network for Autonomous Drivingcited by 73
  8. 2022A Survey on Automated Driving System Testing: Landscapes and Trendscited by 36
  9. 2021Corner Case Generation and Analysis for Safety Assessment of Autonomous Vehiclescited by 27
  10. 2020RTAMT: Online Robustness Monitors from STLcited by 19
  11. 2021Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems: Where Are We and Where Should We Go?cited by 19
  12. 2022LawBreaker: An Approach for Specifying Traffic Laws and Fuzzing Autonomous Vehiclescited by 16
4 more
  1. 2023BehAVExplor: Behavior Diversity Guided Testing for Autonomous Driving Systemscited by 11
  2. 2024Generating Out-Of-Distribution Scenarios Using Language Modelscited by 10
  3. 2023Clustering-based Criticality Analysis for Testing of Automated Driving Systemscited by 2
  4. 2024Dance of the ADS: Orchestrating Failures through Historically-Informed Scenario Fuzzingcited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.