Alireza Abbaspour

Alireza Abbaspour, Tejaskumar Balgonda Patil, B Ravi Kiran et al.

Dataset integrity is fundamental to the safety and reliability of AI systems, especially in autonomous driving. This paper presents a structured framework for developing safe datasets aligned with ISO/PAS 8800 guidelines. Using AI-based perception systems as the primary use case, it introduces the AI Data Flywheel and the dataset lifecycle, covering data collection, annotation, curation, and maintenance. The framework incorporates rigorous safety analyses to identify hazards and mitigate risks caused by dataset insufficiencies. It also defines processes for establishing dataset safety requirements and proposes verification and validation strategies to ensure compliance with safety standards. In addition to outlining best practices, the paper reviews recent research and emerging trends in dataset safety and autonomous vehicle development, providing insights into current challenges and future directions. By integrating these perspectives, the paper aims to advance robust, safety-assured AI systems for autonomous driving applications.

Alireza Abbaspour, Shabin Mahadevan, Kilian Zwirglmaier et al.

The intersection of Safety of Intended Functionality (SOTIF) and Functional Safety (FuSa) analysis of driving automation features has traditionally excluded Quality Management (QM) components (components that has no ASIL requirements allocated from vehicle-level HARA) from rigorous safety impact evaluations. While QM components are not typically classified as safety-relevant, recent developments in artificial intelligence (AI) integration reveal that such components can contribute to SOTIF-related hazardous risks. Compliance with emerging AI safety standards, such as ISO/PAS 8800, necessitates re-evaluating safety considerations for these components. This paper examines the necessity of conducting holistic safety analysis and risk assessment on AI components, emphasizing their potential to introduce hazards with the capacity to violate risk acceptance criteria when deployed in safety-critical driving systems, particularly in perception algorithms. Using case studies, we demonstrate how deficiencies in AI-driven perception systems can emerge even in QM-classified components, leading to unintended functional behaviors with critical safety implications. By bridging theoretical analysis with practical examples, this paper argues for the adoption of comprehensive FuSa, SOTIF, and AI standards-driven methodologies to identify and mitigate risks in AI components. The findings demonstrate the importance of revising existing safety frameworks to address the evolving challenges posed by AI, ensuring comprehensive safety assurance across all component classifications spanning multiple safety standards.

Mandar Pitale, Alireza Abbaspour, Devesh Upadhyay

This paper explores the role and challenges of Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms, specifically AI-based software elements, in autonomous driving systems. These AI systems are fundamental in executing real-time critical functions in complex and high-dimensional environments. They handle vital tasks like multi-modal perception, cognition, and decision-making tasks such as motion planning, lane keeping, and emergency braking. A primary concern relates to the ability (and necessity) of AI models to generalize beyond their initial training data. This generalization issue becomes evident in real-time scenarios, where models frequently encounter inputs not represented in their training or validation data. In such cases, AI systems must still function effectively despite facing distributional or domain shifts. This paper investigates the risk associated with overconfident AI models in safety-critical applications like autonomous driving. To mitigate these risks, methods for training AI models that help maintain performance without overconfidence are proposed. This involves implementing certainty reporting architectures and ensuring diverse training data. While various distribution-based methods exist to provide safety mechanisms for AI models, there is a noted lack of systematic assessment of these methods, especially in the context of safety-critical automotive applications. Many methods in the literature do not adapt well to the quick response times required in safety-critical edge applications. This paper reviews these methods, discusses their suitability for safety-critical applications, and highlights their strengths and limitations. The paper also proposes potential improvements to enhance the safety and reliability of AI algorithms in autonomous vehicles in the context of rapid and accurate decision-making processes.