Survey reveals a sensor-centric framework linking measurement physics and uncertainty modeling in autonomous driving, suggesting improved safety integrations.
Autonomous driving systems (ADSs) are reliable only when heterogeneous sensors, estimation algorithms, and safety mechanisms are engineered as a single coherent safety-critical measurement system rather than as loosely coupled modules. Production stacks integrate cameras, LiDAR, automotive radar, and GNSS/IMU, yet deployment remains constrained by modality-specific failure modes, calibration and synchronization drift, and out-of-distribution (OOD) conditions that violate modeling assumptions. These limitations induce overconfidence and downstream decision errors whenever planning assumes certainty sharper than sensing can justify. This survey introduces a sensor-centric framework linking measurement physics, uncertainty propagation, fusion integrity, safety assurance, and risk-aware planning and control. We formalize what each modality physically measures; unify probabilistic, evidential, and conformal uncertainty representations; analyze filtering, factor-graph, BEV, transformer, and state-space fusion architectures with an emphasis on robustness and graceful degradation; and generalize aviation-style integrity concepts (RAIM/ARAIM) to multi-modal autonomy. The distinctive contribution is a single sensor-to-assurance throughline in which every uncertainty representation is tied to its measurement physics, every fusion architecture is evaluated against an explicit integrity-monitoring requirement generalized from RAIM/ARAIM, and every safety-standard clause is mapped to a concrete architectural mechanism. We map these mechanisms onto ISO 26262, ISO 21448 (SOTIF), ISO/PAS 8800, ANSI/UL 4600, and the UNECE framework, and connect perception uncertainty to decision-making through chance-constrained MPC and formal safety filters (RSS, CBF). Industry case studies and emerging V2X and generative-simulation approaches close the loop to deployable safety arguments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iqbal et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: