Branch-Level Fault Localization in ADS Planning via Temporal Coverage Analysis
Sangmin Woo, Dohyun Kim, Donghwan Shin, Yongdae Kim
Abstract
Planning failures in Automated Driving Systems (ADS) are increasingly detected through simulation-based testing, yet localizing their root causes within planning code remains a major challenge. Planning modules execute complex rule-based decision logic over hundreds of frames in a closed-loop interaction with the environment, where faults trigger observable failures only after temporal gaps and under specific execution contexts. These characteristics make traditional spectrum-based fault localization ineffective, as faulty behavior is obscured by execution-level coverage aggregation and limited test diversity. In this paper, we study the problem of debugging planning failures and present a temporal coverage analysis approach for localizing faults in rule-based planning modules. Our key insight is that, while execution-aggregated coverage masks fault behavior, frame-level execution dynamics reveal distinctive temporal signatures that indicate when and how faulty branches activate. Leveraging this insight, our approach first identifies a suspicious frame using planning semantics, and then ranks candidate branches by analyzing their execution behavior within a localized temporal window. We evaluate our approach on 221 reproducible non-collision Apollo planning failures, covering immobility and emergency mission failures. Our results show that temporal coverage analysis enables accurate suspicious-frame identification and substantially reduces branch inspection effort compared to oracle-based and random baselines, effectively localizing faults from a single failing execution. We further analyze failure cases that lack observable execution signals to clarify the fundamental limits of execution-based localization. Overall, this work demonstrates that temporal execution analysis provides a practical and effective foundation for debugging planning failures in rule-based ADS planning modules.
Ask about this paper
Ask your agent about it.
Lune has read the top-tier papers around this one, so every answer names the papers it rests on.
Related papers
- Poirot: Automatic Root Cause Analysis of Safety Violations in ADS Simulation Testing via Hypothetical ReasoningYou Lu, Dingji Wang, Kun Zhang, Bihuan Chen et al.ISSTA 2026
- ACAV: A Framework for Automatic Causality Analysis in Autonomous Vehicle Accident RecordingsHuijia Sun, Christopher M. Poskitt, Yang Sun, Jun Sun et al.ICSE 2024 · 11 citations
- DeFT: Maintaining Determinism and Extracting Unit Tests for Autonomous Driving PlanningYuqi Huai, Yuntianyi Chen, Ziwen Wan, Qi Alfred Chen et al.ICSE 2026
- Too Afraid to Drive: Systematic Discovery of Semantic DoS Vulnerability in Autonomous Driving Planning under Physical-World AttacksZiwen Wan, Junjie Shen, Jalen Chuang, Xin Xia et al.NDSS 2022
- Simulation-Based Validation for Autonomous Driving SystemsChangwen Li, Joseph Sifakis, Qiang Wang, Rongjie Yan et al.ISSTA 2023 · 17 citations
