Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2509.02150

Txt2Sce: Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving System Testing Based on Textual Reports

Abstract

With the rapid advancement of deep learning and related technologies, Autonomous Driving Systems (ADSs) have made significant progress and are gradually being widely applied in safety-critical fields. However, numerous accident reports show that ADSs still encounter challenges in complex scenarios. As a result, scenario-based testing has become essential for identifying defects and ensuring reliable performance. In particular, real-world accident reports offer valuable high-risk scenarios for more targeted ADS testing. Despite their potential, existing methods often rely on visual data, which demands large memory and manual annotation. Additionally, since existing methods do not adopt standardized scenario formats (e.g., OpenSCENARIO), the generated scenarios are often tied to specific platforms and ADS implementations, limiting their scalability and portability. To address these challenges, we propose Txt2Sce, a method for generating test scenarios in OpenSCENARIO format based on textual accident reports. Txt2Sce first uses a LLM to convert textual accident reports into corresponding OpenSCENARIO scenario files. It then generates a derivation-based scenario file tree through scenario disassembly, scenario block mutation, and scenario assembly. By utilizing the derivation relationships between nodes in the scenario tree, Txt2Sce helps developers identify the scenario conditions that trigger unexpected behaviors of ADSs. In the experiments, we employ Txt2Sce to generate 33 scenario file trees, resulting in a total of 4,373 scenario files for testing the open-source ADS, Autoware. The experimental results show that Txt2Sce successfully converts textual reports into valid OpenSCENARIO files, enhances scenario diversity through mutation, and effectively detects unexpected behaviors of Autoware in terms of safety, smartness, and smoothness.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Pin Ji, Yang Feng, Zongtai Li, Xiangchi Zhou, Jia Liu, Jun Sun, Zhihong Zhao. 2025-09-02. Txt2Sce: Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving System Testing Based on Textual Reports. https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.02150

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Is Vibe Coding Safe? Benchmarking Vulnerability of Agent-Generated Code in Real-World Tasks

Vibe coding is a new software development paradigm in which human engineers prompt a large language model (LLM) agent to complete complex coding tasks with little supervision. Although vibe coding is increasingly adopted, is the generated code really safe to deploy in production? To investigate this question, we propose SUSVIBES, a benchmark consisting of 186 feature-request software engineering tasks from real-world open-source projects, for which, human programmers committed vulnerable implementations. We evaluate 12 widely used coding agentic settings with frontier models on the benchmark. Disturbingly, all agents perform poorly in terms of software security. Although 57% of the solutions from SWE-Agent with Claude 4 Sonnet are functionally correct, only 11.8% are secure. Further experiments demonstrate that preliminary security strategies, such as augmenting the feature request with vulnerability hints, cannot mitigate these security issues. Our findings raise serious concerns about the widespread adoption of vibe coding, particularly in security-sensitive applications. The code and dataset are available at https://github.com/LeiLiLab/susvibes. The leaderboard is at https://leililab.github.io/susvibes-leaderboard.

cs.SE

Why3-py: A Tool for Formal Verification of Hypothesis Testing and Meta-Analysis in Python

The reproducibility crisis in scientific research has received widespread recognition, thereby increasing the importance of meta-analyses that integrate statistical analyses from multiple studies. However, statistical methods often have ambiguous and implicit underlying assumptions, which can lead to their erroneous applications and interpretations. To address this issue, we propose a formal verification framework for statistical Python programs. Specifically, we present Why3-py, a Python front-end for the Why3 verification platform that transforms Python code into verification-oriented WhyML representations, addressing the challenges arising from Python's dynamic typing and runtime polymorphism. Furthermore, we extend the StatWhy tool to support the verification of meta-analysis methods. These tools enable meta-analysts to identify overlooked assumptions and misuse of analyses, and to verify the correct use of hypothesis testing and meta-analysis methods in Python code.

cs.SE

What is the Difference Between Me and You? Benchmarking the Quality Gap Between Human-Written and AI-Generated Code

AI coding assistants are becoming co-authors of production software, yet their evaluation centers on functional correctness, leaving open whether their code differs from human code in the quality dimensions dominating lifecycle cost. We compare human-written and AI-generated code at scale: 787,562 function pairs across Python, Java, and C, each human function mined from open-source repositories paired with implementations generated from its docstring by three AI assistants (OpenAI GPT models, DeepSeek-Coder, Qwen2.5-Coder). We characterize structural complexity and statistical naturalness, and map static-analysis findings onto Orthogonal Defect Classification for defects and the Common Weakness Enumeration for vulnerabilities, making authors and languages directly comparable. AI-generated code is structurally compressed and stylistically templated: roughly half the size and branching of human code, clustering apart at the style level. Defect profiles differ in kind: human code concentrates issues of mature codebases, AI code repetitive boilerplate; security is language-dependent, with LLMs producing more, and more severe, findings in Python and Java but fewer high-severity memory-safety findings than humans in C. Once size is controlled for, complexity metrics carry little signal, while naturalness separates authors. Finally, we release CQBench, a benchmark of 27,346 issue-prone tasks with baselines and an evaluation pipeline for quality assurance and security testing.

cs.SE