Aggressiveness-regulated Multi-agent Stress Testing of Autonomous Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emerging era of autonomous vehicles (AVs) presents unprecedented potential for transforming global transportation. As these vehicles begin to permeate our streets, the challenge of ensuring their safety, especially in unprecedented scenarios, looms large, due to the infrequent occurrence of high-risk scenarios within an essentially infinite number of test cases. This Master's thesis explores the intricate challenge of stress testing autonomous vehicles in simulated environments. The study delves into the application of multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) as a tool for stress testing AVs. Although MARL demands higher computational resources, it demonstrates strong ability in uncovering complex accident scenarios. This marks a shift from the state-of-the-art which deploys single-agent reinforcement algorithms that encounter limitations both in the quality of the generated accident scenarios and in their ability to generate complex accident scenarios as the number of traffic participants increases. Central to our approach is the integration of constraints that regulate the level of aggressiveness of traffic participants to induce more realistic and insightful accident scenarios. The thesis also presents the highway-attack-env, an environment for black-box AV testing that allows the assessment of both single and multi-agent reinforcement learning algorithms. The contributions of this research include the introduction of the aforementioned environment and a comprehensive benchmark, as well as a comparative analysis of single-agent and MARL algorithms, underscoring the superiority of the proposed multi-agent, aggressiveness-regulated methodology for AV validation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".