Papers › Evaluating the Impact of Flaky Simulators on Testing Autonomous Driving Systems

Evaluating the Impact of Flaky Simulators on Testing Autonomous Driving Systems

30 Nov 2023arXiv:2311.18768archive 2025-07-28

Mohammad Hossein Amini, Shervin Naseri, Shiva Nejati

Simulators are widely used to test Autonomous Driving Systems (ADS), but their potential flakiness can lead to inconsistent test results. We investigate test flakiness in simulation-based testing of ADS by addressing two key questions: (1) How do flaky ADS simulations impact automated testing that relies on randomized algorithms? and (2) Can machine learning (ML) effectively identify flaky ADS tests while decreasing the required number of test reruns? Our empirical results, obtained from two widely-used open-source ADS simulators and five diverse ADS test setups, show that test flakiness in ADS is a common occurrence and can significantly impact the test results obtained by randomized algorithms. Further, our ML classifiers effectively identify flaky ADS tests using only a single test run, achieving F1-scores of $85$%, $82$% and $96$% for three different ADS test setups. Our classifiers significantly outperform our non-ML baseline, which requires executing tests at least twice, by $31$%, $21$%, and $13$% in F1-score performance, respectively. We conclude with a discussion on the scope, implications and limitations of our study. We provide our complete replication package in a Github repository.

PaperPDFCode

Code

anonoymous9423013/anonymous_paper officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Tasks

Autonomous Driving

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections