Modified-Emergency Index (MEI): A Criticality Metric for Autonomous Driving in Lateral Conflict

Effective, reliable, and efficient evaluation of autonomous driving safety is essential to demonstrate its trustworthiness. Criticality metrics provide an objective means of assessing safety. However, as existing metrics primarily target longitudinal conflicts, accurately quantifying the risks of lateral conflicts - prevalent in urban settings - remains challenging. This paper proposes the Modified-Emergency Index (MEI), a metric designed to quantify evasive effort in lateral conflicts. Compared to the original Emergency Index (EI), MEI refines the estimation of the time available for evasive maneuvers, enabling more precise risk quantification. We validate MEI on a public lateral conflict dataset based on Argoverse-2, from which we extract over 1,500 high-quality AV conflict cases, including more than 500 critical events. MEI is then compared with the well-established ACT and the widely used PET metrics. Results show that MEI consistently outperforms them in accurately quantifying criticality and capturing risk evolution. Overall, these findings highlight MEI as a promising metric for evaluating urban conflicts and enhancing the safety assessment framework for autonomous driving. The open-source implementation is available at https://github.com/AutoChengh/MEI.

CAME: Contrastive Automated Model Evaluation

The Automated Model Evaluation (AutoEval) framework entertains the possibility of evaluating a trained machine learning model without resorting to a labeled testing set. Despite the promise and some decent results, the existing AutoEval methods heavily rely on computing distribution shifts between the unlabelled testing set and the training set. We believe this reliance on the training set becomes another obstacle in shipping this technology to real-world ML development. In this work, we propose Contrastive Automatic Model Evaluation (CAME), a novel AutoEval framework that is rid of involving training set in the loop. The core idea of CAME bases on a theoretical analysis which bonds the model performance with a contrastive loss. Further, with extensive empirical validation, we manage to set up a predictable relationship between the two, simply by deducing on the unlabeled/unseen testing set. The resulting framework CAME establishes a new SOTA results for AutoEval by surpassing prior work significantly.