Mauricio Peña | Searcharxiv

arXiv2025

Determining Absence of Unreasonable Risk: Approval Guidelines for an Automated Driving System Deployment

This paper provides an overview of how the determination of absence of unreasonable risk can be operationalized. It complements previous theoretical work published by existing developers of Automated Driving Systems (ADS) on the overall engineering practices and methodologies for readiness determination. Readiness determination is, at its core, a risk assessment process. It is aimed at evaluating the residual risk associated with a new deployment. The paper proposes methodological criteria to ground the readiness review process for an ADS release. While informed by Waymo's experience in this domain, the criteria presented are agnostic of any specific ADS technological solution and/or architectural choice, to support broad implementation by others in the industry. The paper continues with a discussion on governance and decision-making toward approval of a new release candidate for the ADS. The implementation of the presented criteria requires the existence of appropriate safety management practices in addition to many other cultural, procedural, and operational considerations. As such, the paper is concluded by a statement of limitations for those wishing to replicate part or all of its content.

cs.SE↗

arXiv2023

Building a Credible Case for Safety: Waymo's Approach for the Determination of Absence of Unreasonable Risk

This paper presents an overview of Waymo's approach to building a reliable case for safety - a novel and thorough blueprint for use by any company building fully autonomous driving systems. A safety case for fully autonomous operations is a formal way to explain how a company determines that an AV system is safe enough to be deployed on public roads without a human driver, and it includes evidence to support that determination. It involves an explanation of the system, the methodologies used to develop it, the metrics used to validate it and the actual results of validation tests. Yet, in order to develop a worthwhile safety case, it is first important to understand what makes one credible and well crafted, and align on evaluation criteria. This paper helps enabling such alignment by providing foundational thinking into not only how a system is determined to be ready for deployment but also into justifying that the set of acceptance criteria employed in such determination is sufficient and that their evaluation (and associated methods) is credible. The publication is structured around three complementary perspectives on safety that build upon content published by Waymo since 2020: a layered approach to safety; a dynamic approach to safety; and a credible approach to safety. The proposed approach is methodology-agnostic, so that anyone in the space could employ portions or all of it.

cs.CY↗