Search Results

Driving Automation Systems (DAS) are subject to complex road environments and vehicle behaviors and increasingly rely on sophisticated sensors and Artificial Intelligence (AI). These properties give rise to unique safety faults stemming from specification insufficiencies and technological performance limitations, where sensors and AI introduce errors that vary in magnitude and temporal patterns, posing potential safety risks. The Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF) standard emerges as a promising framework for addressing these concerns, focusing on scenario-based analysis to identify hazardous behaviors and their causes. Although the current standard provides a basic cause-and-effect model and high-level process guidance, it lacks concepts required to identify and evaluate hazardous errors, especially within the context of AI. This paper introduces two key contributions to bridge this gap.

With the widespread development of automated driving systems (ADS), it is imperative that standardized testing methodologies be developed to assure safety and functionality. Scenario testing evaluates the behavior of an ADS-equipped subject vehicle (SV) in predefined driving scenarios. This paper compares four modes of performing such tests: closed-course testing with real actors, closed-course testing with surrogate actors, simulation testing, and closed-course testing with mixed reality. In a collaboration between the Waterloo Intelligent Systems Engineering (WISE) Lab and AAA, six automated driving scenario tests were executed on a closed course, in simulation, and in mixed reality. These tests involved the University of Waterloo’s automated vehicle, dubbed the “UW Moose”, as the SV, as well as pedestrians, other vehicles, and road debris.