arXiv AI

From Operational Design Domain to Action: A Systematic Behavioral Taxonomy for Autonomous Driving

arXiv:2608. 08941v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Operational Design Domain (ODD) specifications describe where an automated driving system (ADS) is permitted to operate, but they do not prescribe what the ADS must demonstrably do once deployed within that domain.

arXiv AI
Jul 31

Towards Trustworthy Embodied Intelligence: A Systems Framework and Graded Trustworthiness Levels

arXiv:2607. 26121v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Embodied intelligence integrates learned perception and decision making with real-time computation, control, and physical interaction.

By Xinyu Yang, Tianxing Chen, Honghao Su, Minxuan Wang, Chenze Yu, Zhangzheng Tu, Yue Chen, Yuxiao Huo, Lingfeng Zhang, Yan Huang, Yan Qin, Shaolong Zhu, Qiwei Liang, Hekun Tian, Shujia Liu, Guangyu Chen, Junhao Gong, Zixuan Li, Wenwei Lin, Zijian Lin, Wenxuan Zhu, Eric J Chen, Yue Yuan, Qize Yu, Jiaqi Liang, Haowen Yan, Hengfei Zhao, Weijie Wan, Zikun Xiao, Junyuan Tang, Baijun Chen, Kai-Chong Lei, Kaixuan Wang, Kailun Su, Zanxin Chen, Yao Mu, Renjing Xu, Chuqiao Lyu, Qi Xiong, Ping Luo, Wenbo Ding
arXiv AI
Jul 21

DSBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating External and In-Cabin Risks

arXiv:2511. 14592v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language Models (VLMs) show great promise for autonomous driving, but their suitability for safety-critical scenarios is largely unexplored, raising safety concerns.

By Xianhui Meng, Yuchen Zhang, Zhijian Huang, Zheng Lu, Ziling Ji, Yandan Lin, Yaoyao Yin, Hongyuan Zhang, Wei Zhou, Guangfeng Jiang, Li Zhang, Long Chen, Hangjun Ye, Jun Liu, Xiaoshuai Hao
arXiv AI
Aug 11

UGAF-ITS: A Standards Harmonization Framework and Validation Tool for Multi-Framework AI Governance in Distributed Intelligent Transportation Systems

arXiv:2604. 22789v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Organizations deploying AI-enabled Intelligent Transportation Systems face fragmented governance: ISO/IEC~42001 demands a certifiable management system, the EU AI Act imposes binding high-risk obligations from August~2026, and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework structures voluntary practice.

By Talal Ashraf Butt, Muhammad Iqbal, Razi Iqbal
arXiv AI
Jun 8

Re-imagining ISO 26262 in the Age of Autonomous Vehicles: Enhancing Controllability through Transferability and Predictability

arXiv:2606. 07437v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The ISO 26262 standard defines functional safety for road vehicles through risk assessments based on Severity, Exposure, and Controllability, grounded in a human-driven vehicle paradigm.

By Chaitanya Shinde, Hadi Hajieghrary, Paul Schmitt, Adam Shoemaker, Bodo Seifert, Steve Kenner
arXiv AI
1d ago

AeroCopilotBench: A Two-Tier Benchmark for Evaluating LLM Agents as Aviation Copilots in an Interactive Virtual Cockpit Environment

arXiv:2608. 16349v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents may assist flight crews with complex decisions and task execution, but existing aviation evaluations centered on static knowledge do not support systematic testing of procedural execution and safety compliance in interactive environments.

By Yuchen Yuan, Zhenghuang Wu, Yuangan Li, Liang Ma, Ke Li
arXiv AI
Jun 6

Output Type Before Quality: A Standards-Derived XAI Admissibility Rubric for Autonomous-Driving Safety

arXiv:2606. 05461v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety standards for ML-based autonomous driving specify the kind of evidence an assurance case must contain (directed cause-and-effect chains, quantified interventional effects, named root-cause variables), yet the XAI literature is organised by output type and technique family (saliency maps, feature attribution, counterfactuals, causal graphs, language traces).

By Abhinaw Priyadershi, Mandar Pitale, Jelena Frtunikj, Maria Spence
arXiv AI
Jul 2

Managed Autonomy at Runtime: Gear-Based Safety and Governance for Single- and Multi-Agent Cyber-Physical Systems

arXiv:2607. 00334v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autonomous agents, whether LLM-driven software agents or robotic physical agents, face a common class of failure modes when operating without continuous human oversight: safety violations from unverified actions, behavioral instability from unconstrained loops, and continuity loss from unhandled error states.

By Srini Ramaswamy, Wang Miaosheng