mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Adversarial Robustness Analysis of Cloud-Assisted Autonomous Driving Systems

arXiv 2604.04349 ↗First posted 6 Apr 2026cs.RO cs.LGcited by 0

On the map: End-to-end autonomous driving → Adversarial scenarios and safety testing

Abstract (arXiv)

Autonomous vehicles increasingly rely on deep learning-based perception and control, which impose substantial computational demands. Cloud-assisted architectures offload these functions to remote servers, enabling enhanced perception and coordinated decision-making through the Internet of Vehicles (IoV). However, this paradigm introduces cross-layer vulnerabilities, where adversarial manipulation of perception models and network impairments in the vehicle-cloud link can jointly undermine safety-critical autonomy. This paper presents a hardware-in-the-loop IoV testbed that integrates real-time perception, control, and communication to evaluate such vulnerabilities in cloud-assisted autonomous driving. A YOLOv8-based object detector deployed on the cloud is subjected to whitebox adversarial attacks using the Fast Gradient Sign Method (FGSM) and Projected Gradient Descent (PGD), while network adversaries induce delay and packet loss in the vehicle-cloud loop. Results show that adversarial perturbations significantly degrade perception performance, with PGD reducing detection precision and recall from 0.73 and 0.68 in the clean baseline to 0.22 and 0.15 at epsilon= 0.04. Network delays of 150-250 ms, corresponding to transient losses of approximately 3-4 frames, and packet loss rates of 0.5-5 % further destabilize closed-loop control, leading to delayed actuation and rule violations. These findings highlight the need for cross-layer resilience in cloud-assisted autonomous driving systems.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Adversarial scenarios and safety testing, one of 9 directions in End-to-end autonomous driving. Builds on 7 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Apr 2026.

Builds on

7 of 21 references.

References · 7

  1. 2014Explaining and Harnessing Adversarial Examplescited by 7,287
  2. 2017Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attackscited by 6,326
  3. 2021MetaDrive: Composing Diverse Driving Scenarios for Generalizable Reinforcement Learningcited by 281
  4. 2021Advances in adversarial attacks and defenses in computer vision: A surveycited by 127
  5. 2022"Real Attackers Don't Compute Gradients": Bridging the Gap Between Adversarial ML Research and Practicecited by 55
  6. 2023Leveraging Cloud Computing to Make Autonomous Vehicles Safercited by 7
  7. 2024A Survey on Small-Scale Testbeds for Connected and Automated Vehicles and Robot Swarmscited by 4

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026AD2: Analysis and Detection of Adversarial Threats in Visual Perception for End-to-End Autonomous Driving Systems
  2. 2025Revisiting Adversarial Perception Attacks and Defense Methods on Autonomous Driving Systems
  3. 2026Comparative Analysis of Patch Attack on VLM-Based Autonomous Driving Architectures
  4. 2021Evaluating Adversarial Attacks on Driving Safety in Vision-Based Autonomous Vehicles
  5. 2025Toward Inherently Robust VLMs Against Visual Perception Attacks
  6. 2026Beyond Crash: Hijacking Your Autonomous Vehicle for Fun and Profit
  7. 2026Understanding Adversarial Transferability in Vision-Language Models for Autonomous Driving: A Cross-Architecture Analysis
  8. 2026Adversarial Flow Matching for Imperceptible Attacks on End-to-End Autonomous Driving