Hierarchical Fault Localization for Autonomous Driving Systems with Hypothesis Validation and Intent Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.12598v1
• Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 10:17:01 GMT
• Title: Hierarchical Fault Localization for Autonomous Driving Systems with Hypothesis Validation and Intent Analysis
• Abstract summary: We present HINT, a two-phase framework for hierarchical ADS fault localization based on hypothesis validation and intent analysis.<n>In Phase I, HINT transforms failure-triggering execution recordings into multi-modal abstractions.<n>In Phase II, it reconstructs design-side intent and implementation-side behavior, then localizes suspicious code through reliability-aware consistency checking.
• Score: 14.387618464803774
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Comprehensive testing is essential for the safety and reliability of Autonomous Driving Systems (ADS). Existing techniques can detect system-level failures or attribute them to coarse-grained modules, but they often fall short of localizing the root cause in source code. As a result, debugging remains labor-intensive, requiring developers to connect behavioral violations with complex implementation logic. To address this gap, we present HINT, a two-phase framework for hierarchical ADS fault localization based on hypothesis validation and intent analysis. In Phase I, HINT transforms failure-triggering execution recordings into multi-modal abstractions and uses causal reasoning to identify the responsible module. In Phase II, it reconstructs design-side intent and implementation-side behavior, then localizes suspicious code through reliability-aware consistency checking, without costly re-simulation. We evaluate HINT on Apollo across diverse failure modes and modules. The results show that HINT achieves the strongest overall performance across module-level diagnosis and code-level localization metrics, with 77.8% end-to-end Class@5 accuracy on real-world bugs.

Related papers

• DCFA: Dual-view Causal-inspired Attribution for Failure Reasoning in LLM-based Multi-agent Systems [61.11435469308521]
  We propose DCFA, a training-free framework for failure attribution in large language model systems.<n> DCFA integrates a global module that constructs structured causal-inspired dependency graphs from system traces.<n>Experiments show that DCFA improves step-level accuracy by up to 8.27% over state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-04T05:29:31Z)
• VerifyMAS: Hypothesis Verification for Failure Attribution in LLM Multi-Agent Systems [79.51005192758262]
  Large language model-driven multi-agent systems excel at complex tasks.<n>However, unreliable agents remain a key bottleneck to system-level reliability.<n>We propose a hypothesis verification framework for agent failure attribution.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T14:09:35Z)
• Similar Pattern Annotation via Retrieval Knowledge for LLM-Based Test Code Fault Localization [5.9162004338597365]
  Failures in software can originate from faulty system test scripts.<n>Test Code Fault localization (TCFL) has received significantly less attention despite its importance in continuous integration environments.<n>We propose SPARK, a framework that integrates accumulated debug knowledge fromCI environments into Large Language Model (LLM)-based TCFL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-08T16:20:58Z)
• Dynamic analysis enhances issue resolution [53.50448142467294]
  DAIRA (Dynamic Analysis-enhanced Issue Resolution Agent) is an automated repair framework that embeds dynamic analysis into the agent's reasoning cycle.<n> Driven by a Test Tracing-Driven methodology, DAIRA utilizes lightweight monitors to extract critical runtime data.<n>When powered by Gemini 3 Flash Preview, DAIRA establishes a new state-of-the-art (SOTA) performance, achieving a 79.4% resolution rate on the SWE-bench Verified dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-23T14:48:54Z)
• VIBEPASS: Can Vibe Coders Really Pass the Vibe Check? [46.85901599242161]
  We evaluate two coupled tasks: emphFault-Triggering Test Generation (FT-Test) and emphFault-targeted Program Repair (FPR)<n>We find that fault-targeted reasoning does not scale with general coding ability.<n>Test-guided repair reveals a complementary insight: when self-generated tests successfully witness a fault, the resulting repair matches or outperforms repair guided by externally provided tests, but tests that fail to witness the fault actively degrade repair below unguided baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T21:14:28Z)
• AgentFixer: From Failure Detection to Fix Recommendations in LLM Agentic Systems [7.429835301272413]
  The framework includes fifteen failure-detection tools and two root-cause analysis modules.<n>It integrates lightweight rule-based checks with LLM-as-a-judge assessments to support structured incident detection, classification, and repair.<n>We applied the framework to IBM CUGA, evaluating its performance on the AppWorld and WebArena benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-18T14:55:35Z)
• ProbeLLM: Automating Principled Diagnosis of LLM Failures [89.44131968886184]
  We propose ProbeLLM, a benchmark-agnostic automated probing framework that elevates weakness discovery from individual failures to structured failure modes.<n>By restricting probing to verifiable test cases and leveraging tool-augmented generation and verification, ProbeLLM grounds failure discovery in reliable evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-13T14:33:13Z)
• The Semantic Trap: Do Fine-tuned LLMs Learn Vulnerability Root Cause or Just Functional Pattern? [14.472036099680961]
  We propose TrapEval, a comprehensive evaluation framework designed to disentangle vulnerability root cause from functional pattern.<n>We fine-tune five representative state-of-the-art LLMs across three model families and evaluate them under cross-dataset testing, semantic-preservings, and varying degrees of semantic gap measured by CodeBLEU.<n>Our findings serve as a wake-up call: high benchmark scores on traditional datasets may be illusory, masking the model's inability to understand the true causal logic of vulnerabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-30T07:19:17Z)
• Why Does the LLM Stop Computing: An Empirical Study of User-Reported Failures in Open-Source LLMs [50.075587392477935]
  We conduct the first large-scale empirical study of 705 real-world failures from the open-source DeepSeek, Llama, and Qwen ecosystems.<n>Our analysis reveals a paradigm shift: white-box orchestration relocates the reliability bottleneck from model algorithmic defects to the systemic fragility of the deployment stack.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-20T06:42:56Z)
• InspectCoder: Dynamic Analysis-Enabled Self Repair through interactive LLM-Debugger Collaboration [71.18377595277018]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently generate buggy code with complex logic errors that are challenging to diagnose.<n>We present InspectCoder, the first agentic program repair system that empowers LLMs to actively conduct dynamic analysis via interactive debugger control.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-21T06:26:29Z)

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.