拆解自动驾驶模型的分布外鲁棒性,找出关键失效因素。
Robustness Is a Function, Not a Number: A Factorized Comprehensive Study of OOD Robustness in Vision-Based Driving
- 按场景、季节、天气等五维度分步测试模型性能变化。
- 夜间和城乡切换导致性能下降超30%,多因素叠加更致命。
- 用冻结基础模型特征可提升鲁棒性,适合实际部署优化。
自动驾驶中的分布外(OOD)鲁棒性常被简化为单一数值,掩盖了具体失效原因。本文沿五个维度分解环境:场景(乡村/城市)、季节、天气、时间(白天/黑夜)和代理混合;在VISTA闭环控制下,对全连接(FC)、CNN和ViT策略进行受控k-因子扰动测试(k ∈ {0,1,2,3})。比较了不同模型架构与训练策略,包括在冻结基础模型(FM)特征上训练紧凑的ViT头,并调整了域内(ID)支持的规模、多样性与时间上下文。结果表明:(1)同等规模下,ViT策略显著优于CNN/FC,FM特征实现当前最优成功率但有延迟代价;(2)简单的多帧输入无法超越最佳单帧基线;(3)最大单因素降幅出现在乡村→城市和白天→黑夜,分别约31%;演员替换约10%,中雨约7%;季节变化可能剧烈,且时间与其它因素组合会进一步恶化表现;(4)使用FM特征的策略在三重同时变化下仍保持85%以上成功,非FM单帧策略首跳损失大,所有非FM模型在三重变化后均低于50%;(5)因素间存在非加性交互:部分组合可部分抵消,而季节-时间组合尤其有害;(6)在冬季/雪天训练最抗单因素扰动,而乡村+夏季基线整体表现最优;(7)增加轨迹数(从5到14)提升鲁棒性11.8个百分点,但针对性暴露于困难条件可替代规模扩展;(8)使用多个域内环境可扩大覆盖范围并增强弱项(如城市OOD从60.6%提升至70.1%),仅小幅牺牲峰值性能;单域训练虽保高峰但局限性强。研究提出可操作的设计准则以提升自动驾驶系统的分布外鲁棒性。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Out of distribution (OOD) robustness in autonomous driving is often reduced to a single number, hiding what breaks a policy. We decompose environments along five axes: scene (rural/urban), season, weather, time (day/night), and agent mix; and measure performance under controlled $k$-factor perturbations ($k \in \{0,1,2,3\}$). Using closed loop control in VISTA, we benchmark FC, CNN, and ViT policies, train compact ViT heads on frozen foundation-model (FM) features, and vary ID support in scale, diversity, and temporal context. (1) ViT policies are markedly more OOD-robust than comparably sized CNN/FC, and FM features yield state-of-the-art success at a latency cost. (2) Naive temporal inputs (multi-frame) do not beat the best single-frame baseline. (3) The largest single factor drops are rural $\rightarrow$ urban and day $\rightarrow$ night ($\sim 31\%$ each); actor swaps $\sim 10\%$, moderate rain $\sim 7\%$; season shifts can be drastic, and combining a time flip with other changes further degrades performance. (4) FM-feature policies stay above $85\%$ under three simultaneous changes; non-FM single-frame policies take a large first-shift hit, and all no-FM models fall below $50\%$ by three changes. (5) Interactions are non-additive: some pairings partially offset, whereas season-time combinations are especially harmful. (6) Training on winter/snow is most robust to single-factor shifts, while a rural+summer baseline gives the best overall OOD performance. (7) Scaling traces/views improves robustness ($+11.8$ points from $5$ to $14$ traces), yet targeted exposure to hard conditions can substitute for scale. (8) Using multiple ID environments broadens coverage and strengthens weak cases (urban OOD $60.6\% \rightarrow 70.1\%$) with a small ID drop; single-ID preserves peak performance but in a narrow domain. These results yield actionable design rules for OOD-robust driving policies.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。