The paper proposes a new framework for automated fault diagnostics in modern vehicles by treating diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) as a high‑dimensional language. It introduces Transformer‑based models for predictive maintenance, scalable causal discovery methods, and a multi‑agent system that automatically generates Boolean error‑pattern rules. The approach aims to replace costly manual grouping of DTCs with scalable, data‑driven techniques.
By Hugo Math
arXiv:2603. 04818v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Disruptions at critical logistics nodes pose severe risks to global supply chains, yet existing risk prediction systems typically prioritize forecasting accuracy without providing operationally interpretable early warnings.
By Zhiming Xue, Yujue Wang, Menghao Huo
The paper introduces a two‑stage training framework that combines Supervised Fine‑Tuning (SFT) and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) to improve multimodal disaster severity assessment. It creates two datasets—ReasoningSet for validated rationales and PreferenceSet for paired rationales—using a single Human‑in‑the‑Loop workflow. Experiments on InternVL‑3‑8B and LLaVA‑1.5‑7B show that SFT boosts classification accuracy and Macro‑F1, while DPO further enhances interpretability and alignment with human judgment.
By Yuanjun Zhang, Fuzel Ahamed Shaik, Suvojit Acharjee, Fahad Khalid, Mourad Oussalah
arXiv:2607. 22385v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Diagnosing the root cause of anomalies is essential for safe industrial operation.
By Amaury Wei, Olga Fink
arXiv:2607. 03847v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Understanding why discovered scenarios become critical in scenario-based testing is essential for effectively leveraging them in decision-making systems.
By Qitong Chu, Xunjie He, Chen Deng, Huaxin Pei, Yufeng Yue
SAFARI is the first industrial benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in automotive hazard analysis and risk assessment (HARA) under ISO 26262. It comprises 3,000 de‑identified HARA cases and tests two tasks: open‑ended hazard generation and standards‑grounded risk classification, using a novel reference‑anchored LLM‑as‑a‑judge protocol. Experiments with nine state‑of‑the‑art LLMs show that while hazard narratives are often plausible, risk classification remains weak (best ASIL macro‑F1 = 0.261), with errors mainly due to missing scenario context and misjudged controllability.
"whyItMatters":"The benchmark highlights the current limitations of LLMs in safety‑critical engineering workflows, guiding future research and expert oversight in automotive safety analysis."
By Chenxi Wu, Zimu Wang, Haiyang Zhang, Wei Wang, Zhijie Xu