Effective edge-case catalogs for occluded intersections turn vague “what if” concerns into reproducible, auditable test cases for perception, prediction and planning. Below is a practical, engineering-focused process teams can follow to create catalogs that exercise the intersection of occlusion and traffic-rule complexity.
1 — Define scope and objectives
Specify what the catalog must achieve (e.g., validate conservative planner responses under occlusion + stop-sign ambiguity; measure false-negative risk for unseen cross-traffic). Choose the system-under-test (perception stack, prediction, planner, or integrated). Define pass/fail criteria and which metrics matter: collision rate, near-miss counts, time-to-brake, violation of legal constraints, and uncertainty calibration.
2 — Taxonomy: decompose occlusion × rule dimensions
Create orthogonal axes so scenarios are combinable and searchable. Example axes:
- Occlusion type: static (parked truck, building), dynamic (moving truck, bus), sensor (LiDAR blindspot), partial (curbside parked cars)
- Visibility conditions: daylight, night, rain, glare, fog
- Intersection geometry: T-junction, four-way, roundabout, multi-lane)
- Traffic rule context: stop sign, traffic light (malfunctioning/hidden), yield, right-of-way ambiguity, temporary control (flagger/construction)
- Actor behaviours: compliant (full stop), rolling stop, aggressive (pulls out), unpredictable (pedestrian darting), out-of-distribution actors (e.g., scooter with trailer)
- Exposure parameters: approach speed, trigger distance, timing offsets, number of adversaries
- Sensor state: degraded, miscalibrated, intermittent dropout
3 — Scenario representation and parametrization
Represent each catalog entry as a compact parametric template: geometry id, occluder type & location, actor templates (behavior models + probabilistic parameters), lighting/weather, sensor-mode flags, and acceptance thresholds. Use machine-readable formats (OpenSCENARIO/ASAM or internal JSON) so entries can be instantiated in simulators and replay pipelines.
4 — Sources and discovery methods
Populate the catalog from multiple signals:
- Field telemetry & human incident reports: extract segments where occlusion + rule intersections correlate with anomalies.
- Rule-based mining: query logs for patterns (e.g., ego stopped at stop sign while cross-traffic crosses within 2s).
- Model-driven discovery: flag low-confidence perception/prediction episodes and trace to occlusion contexts.
- Expert elicitation: safety engineers and human factors specialists suggest plausible-but-rare behaviours.
- Synthetic generation: procedural parameter sweeps and RL-based adversarial generators to expose worst-case behaviors.
5 — Prioritization and triage
Score scenarios by three core axes and combine into a priority rank: severity (potential for harm), exposure (likelihood in operational design domain), and detectability (how hard it is for the system to identify). Use a simple weighted formula to produce high/medium/low priority buckets and focus validation resources on the top deciles.
6 — Labelling and metadata
Attach standardized metadata to each entry: unique ID, taxonomy tags, parametrization ranges, expected safe behaviour, failure modes, linked telemetry examples, reproducibility notes, and quality level (real / replay / synthetic). Include an explicit assertion of the required conservative behaviour (e.g., “yield until cross-traffic clearance > 3s”).
7 — Test harnesses: replay, simulation, and closed-loop
Ensure each scenario can be exercised in three modes:
- Replay validation: run recorded sensor & ground-truth traces through perception/prediction modules.
- High-fidelity simulation: instantiate parametrized scenarios to stress perception and planner with controlled variations (lighting, timing, sensor noise).
- Closed-loop adversarial testing: run the full stack in-the-loop with behavioral agents that react to the ego’s actions to reveal planning weaknesses.
8 — Metrics, logging, and auditability
Log structured outcomes for each run: metric vector (collisions, TTC distribution, planner cost exceedances, violation flags), confidence/uncertainty traces, and decision rationales (rule constraints hit). Store run artifacts tied to the scenario ID for traceable audits and regression tests.
9 — Validation workflows and acceptance gates
Define acceptance gates per priority bucket (e.g., all high-priority scenarios must pass closed-loop simulation with zero collisions and no rule violations). Use continuous integration to re-run critical scenarios when perception or planner changes. Maintain an approval workflow for adding new high-priority scenarios.
10 — Maintenance: coverage tracking and lifecycle
Track catalog coverage by mapping production miles and failure reports to taxonomy buckets; visualize gaps and trending increases in a dashboard. Periodically prune obsolete scenarios, merge near-duplicates, and promote synthetic seeds to recorded-ground-truth pairings when real data appears.
Checklist (quick)
- Define SUT, metrics, and acceptance criteria
- Create occlusion × rule taxonomy
- Parametrize scenarios in a machine-readable format
- Source candidate cases from logs, models, experts, and simulation
- Prioritize by severity, exposure, detectability
- Attach rich metadata and expected conservative behaviour
- Run replay, simulation, and closed-loop tests
- Log auditable results and gate high-priority passes
- Continuously track coverage and refresh the catalog
Following this process produces a usable, auditable edge-case catalog that specifically targets the risks at occluded intersections and the interaction with traffic rules—turning vague long-tail concerns into concrete validation workstreams.
Sources
- Generating Edge Cases for Testing Autonomous Vehicles Using Real-World Data (Sensors (Basel); 2023-12-25; Official source)
- A Systematic Review of Edge Case Detection in Automated Driving (arXiv; 2024-10-11)