Moral Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.03683v1
• Date: Tue, 06 May 2025 16:29:58 GMT
• Title: Moral Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems
• Authors: Wenbing Tang, Mingfei Cheng, Yuan Zhou, Yang Liu,
• Abstract summary: Testing Autonomous Driving System (ADS) morality is nearly impossible due to the absence of universal moral principles.<n>This paper first extracts a set of moral meta-principles derived from existing moral experiments and well-established social science theories, aiming to capture widely recognized and common-sense moral values for ADSs.<n>We propose a metamorphic testing framework to systematically identify potential moral issues.
• Score: 11.716255501861388
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Autonomous Driving System (ADS) testing plays a crucial role in their development, with the current focus primarily on functional and safety testing. However, evaluating the non-functional morality of ADSs, particularly their decision-making capabilities in unavoidable collision scenarios, is equally important to ensure the systems' trustworthiness and public acceptance. Unfortunately, testing ADS morality is nearly impossible due to the absence of universal moral principles. To address this challenge, this paper first extracts a set of moral meta-principles derived from existing moral experiments and well-established social science theories, aiming to capture widely recognized and common-sense moral values for ADSs. These meta-principles are then formalized as quantitative moral metamorphic relations, which act as the test oracle. Furthermore, we propose a metamorphic testing framework to systematically identify potential moral issues. Finally, we illustrate the implementation of the framework and present typical violation cases using the VIRES VTD simulator and its built-in ADS.

Related papers

• Are Language Models Consequentialist or Deontological Moral Reasoners? [69.85385952436044]
  We focus on a large-scale analysis of the moral reasoning traces provided by large language models (LLMs)<n>We introduce and test a taxonomy of moral rationales to systematically classify reasoning traces according to two main normative ethical theories: consequentialism and deontology.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-27T17:51:18Z)
• LLM Ethics Benchmark: A Three-Dimensional Assessment System for Evaluating Moral Reasoning in Large Language Models [8.018569128518187]
  This study establishes a novel framework for systematically evaluating the moral reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>Our framework addresses this challenge by quantifying alignment with human ethical standards through three dimensions.<n>This approach enables precise identification of ethical strengths and weaknesses in LLMs, facilitating targeted improvements and stronger alignment with societal values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-01T20:36:19Z)
• Black-Box Adversarial Attack on Vision Language Models for Autonomous Driving [65.61999354218628]
  We take the first step toward designing black-box adversarial attacks specifically targeting vision-language models (VLMs) in autonomous driving systems.<n>We propose Cascading Adversarial Disruption (CAD), which targets low-level reasoning breakdown by generating and injecting semantics.<n>We present Risky Scene Induction, which addresses dynamic adaptation by leveraging a surrogate VLM to understand and construct high-level risky scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-23T11:10:02Z)
• On the Fairness, Diversity and Reliability of Text-to-Image Generative Models [68.62012304574012]
  multimodal generative models have sparked critical discussions on their reliability, fairness and potential for misuse.<n>We propose an evaluation framework to assess model reliability by analyzing responses to global and local perturbations in the embedding space.<n>Our method lays the groundwork for detecting unreliable, bias-injected models and tracing the provenance of embedded biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T09:46:55Z)
• Exploring and steering the moral compass of Large Language Models [55.2480439325792]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become central to advancing automation and decision-making across various sectors. This study proposes a comprehensive comparative analysis of the most advanced LLMs to assess their moral profiles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-27T16:49:22Z)
• Informed AI Regulation: Comparing the Ethical Frameworks of Leading LLM Chatbots Using an Ethics-Based Audit to Assess Moral Reasoning and Normative Values [0.0]
  Ethics-based audits play a pivotal role in the rapidly growing fields of AI safety and regulation. This paper undertakes an ethics-based audit to probe the 8 leading commercial and open-source Large Language Models including GPT-4.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-09T14:57:30Z)
• Hybrid Approaches for Moral Value Alignment in AI Agents: a Manifesto [3.7414804164475983]
  Increasing interest in ensuring the safety of next-generation Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems calls for novel approaches to embedding morality into autonomous agents.<n>We provide a systematization of existing approaches to the problem of introducing morality in machines - modelled as a continuum.<n>We argue that more hybrid solutions are needed to create adaptable and robust, yet controllable and interpretable agentic systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-04T11:46:34Z)
• Rethinking Machine Ethics -- Can LLMs Perform Moral Reasoning through the Lens of Moral Theories? [78.3738172874685]
  Making moral judgments is an essential step toward developing ethical AI systems. Prevalent approaches are mostly implemented in a bottom-up manner, which uses a large set of annotated data to train models based on crowd-sourced opinions about morality. This work proposes a flexible top-down framework to steer (Large) Language Models (LMs) to perform moral reasoning with well-established moral theories from interdisciplinary research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-29T15:57:32Z)
• Modeling Moral Choices in Social Dilemmas with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [4.2050490361120465]
  A bottom-up learning approach may be more appropriate for studying and developing ethical behavior in AI agents. We present a systematic analysis of the choices made by intrinsically-motivated RL agents whose rewards are based on moral theories. We analyze the impact of different types of morality on the emergence of cooperation, defection or exploitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-20T09:36:42Z)
• When to Make Exceptions: Exploring Language Models as Accounts of Human Moral Judgment [96.77970239683475]
  AI systems need to be able to understand, interpret and predict human moral judgments and decisions. A central challenge for AI safety is capturing the flexibility of the human moral mind. We present a novel challenge set consisting of rule-breaking question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-04T09:04:27Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.