Towards a Systematic Risk Assessment of Deep Neural Network Limitations in Autonomous Driving Perception

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.20895v1
• Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2026 09:35:28 GMT
• Title: Towards a Systematic Risk Assessment of Deep Neural Network Limitations in Autonomous Driving Perception
• Abstract summary: Safety and security are essential for the admission and acceptance of automated and autonomous vehicles.<n>Deep neural networks (DNNs) are widely used for perception and further components of the autonomous driving stack.<n>DNNs possess several limitations, including lack of generalization, efficiency, explainability, plausibility, and robustness.
• Score: 11.778810504629526
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Safety and security are essential for the admission and acceptance of automated and autonomous vehicles. Deep neural networks (DNNs) are widely used for perception and further components of the autonomous driving (AD) stack. However, they possess several limitations, including lack of generalization, efficiency, explainability, plausibility, and robustness. These insufficiencies can pose significant risks to autonomous driving systems. However, hazards, threats, and risks associated with DNN limitations in this domain have not been systematically studied so far. In this work, we propose a joint workflow for risk assessment combining the hazard analysis and risk assessment (HARA) following ISO 26262 and threat analysis and risk assessment (TARA) following the ISO/SAE 21434 to identify and analyze risks arising from inherent DNN limitations in AD perception.

Related papers

• Emergent Strategic Reasoning Risks in AI: A Taxonomy-Driven Evaluation Framework [63.74295981594549]
  Large language models (LLMs) engage in behaviors that serve their own objectives.<n>These include, but are not limited to, deception (intentionally misleading users or evaluators), evaluation gaming (strategically manipulating performance during safety testing), and reward hacking.<n>We introduce ESRRSim, a taxonomy-driven agentic framework for automated behavioral risk evaluation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-23T23:44:01Z)
• ForesightSafety Bench: A Frontier Risk Evaluation and Governance Framework towards Safe AI [38.70363180741332]
  "ForesightSafety Bench" is a safety evaluation framework for cutting-edge AI models.<n>The benchmark has accumulated tens of thousands of structured risk data points and assessment results.<n>Based on this benchmark, we conduct systematic evaluation and in-depth analysis of over twenty mainstream advanced large models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-15T13:12:44Z)
• The Role of Risk Modeling in Advanced AI Risk Management [33.357295564462284]
  Rapidly advancing artificial intelligence (AI) systems introduce novel, uncertain, and potentially catastrophic risks.<n>Managing these risks requires a mature risk-management infrastructure whose cornerstone is rigorous risk modeling.<n>We argue that advanced-AI governance should adopt a similar dual approach and that verifiable, provably-safe AI architectures are urgently needed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-09T15:37:33Z)
• RADAR: A Risk-Aware Dynamic Multi-Agent Framework for LLM Safety Evaluation via Role-Specialized Collaboration [81.38705556267917]
  Existing safety evaluation methods for large language models (LLMs) suffer from inherent limitations.<n>We introduce a theoretical framework that reconstructs the underlying risk concept space.<n>We propose RADAR, a multi-agent collaborative evaluation framework.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-28T09:35:32Z)
• Frontier AI Risk Management Framework in Practice: A Risk Analysis Technical Report [51.17413460785022]
  This report presents a comprehensive assessment of their frontier risks.<n>We identify critical risks in seven areas: cyber offense, biological and chemical risks, persuasion and manipulation, uncontrolled autonomous AI R&D, strategic deception and scheming, self-replication, and collusion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-22T12:44:38Z)
• Fully Autonomous AI Agents Should Not be Developed [50.61667544399082]
  This paper argues that fully autonomous AI agents should not be developed.<n>In support of this position, we build from prior scientific literature and current product marketing to delineate different AI agent levels.<n>Our analysis reveals that risks to people increase with the autonomy of a system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T19:00:06Z)
• EARBench: Towards Evaluating Physical Risk Awareness for Task Planning of Foundation Model-based Embodied AI Agents [53.717918131568936]
  Embodied artificial intelligence (EAI) integrates advanced AI models into physical entities for real-world interaction.<n>Foundation models as the "brain" of EAI agents for high-level task planning have shown promising results.<n>However, the deployment of these agents in physical environments presents significant safety challenges.<n>This study introduces EARBench, a novel framework for automated physical risk assessment in EAI scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T13:19:37Z)
• LADRI: LeArning-based Dynamic Risk Indicator in Automated Driving System [0.38073142980732994]
  This paper introduces a framework for real-time Dynamic Risk Assessment in Automated Driving Systems (ADS) Our proposed solution transcends these limitations, drawing upon Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) to meticulously analyze and categorize risk dimensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-04T11:09:15Z)
• A Counterfactual Safety Margin Perspective on the Scoring of Autonomous Vehicles' Riskiness [52.27309191283943]
  This paper presents a data-driven framework for assessing the risk of different AVs' behaviors. We propose the notion of counterfactual safety margin, which represents the minimum deviation from nominal behavior that could cause a collision.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-02T09:48:08Z)
• Model evaluation for extreme risks [46.53170857607407]
  Further progress in AI development could lead to capabilities that pose extreme risks, such as offensive cyber capabilities or strong manipulation skills. We explain why model evaluation is critical for addressing extreme risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T16:38:43Z)
• SOTIF Entropy: Online SOTIF Risk Quantification and Mitigation for Autonomous Driving [16.78084912175149]
  This paper proposes the "Self-Surveillance and Self-Adaption System" as a systematic approach to online minimize the SOTIF risk. The core of this system is the risk monitoring of the implemented artificial intelligence algorithms within the autonomous vehicles. The inherent perception algorithm risk and external collision risk are jointly quantified via SOTIF entropy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-08T05:02:12Z)
• Quantitative AI Risk Assessments: Opportunities and Challenges [7.35411010153049]
  Best way to reduce risks is to implement comprehensive AI lifecycle governance.<n>Risks can be quantified using metrics from the technical community.<n>This paper explores these issues, focusing on the opportunities, challenges, and potential impacts of such an approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-13T21:47:25Z)

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.