Sensitivity Analysis of GRU, LSTM and Transformer Encoder in Classification of Automated Driving Systems
Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:Sensitivity Analysis of GRU, LSTM and Transformer Encoder in Classification of Automated Driving Systems
Abstract:Automated driving systems (ADSs) are becoming ubiquitous. Future Software Defined Vehicles (SDVs) may be able to run multiple ADSs, both native and aftermarket such as this http URL's Openpilot. Monitoring systems to independently verify which automated driving system is active are important for safety monitoring, regulatory compliance, insurance assessment, and anomaly detection. In this paper, we first evaluate the effectiveness of three sequence-based classification models: Gated Recurrent Units (GRU), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks, and a Transformer encoder model for identifying Level 2 automated driving systems using vehicle telematics data alone: Comma Openpilot, Tesla Autopilot, and Cadillac Super Cruise, along with manual driving. All three models achieve strong clean-data performance with macro F1-scores of 0.92 (GRU), 0.90 (LSTM), and 0.93 (Transformer encoder model) when trained on clean data; threat-matched training yields 0.904-0.916 macro F1 with only a modest clean-data penalty. Second, we introduce a modular robustness evaluation framework that simulates realistic telematics degradation through five corruption families at five severity levels (L1-L5). Continuous channels are perturbed using additive white Gaussian noise with cumulative drift, correlated cross-channel noise, and temporal jitter. Binary event signals are subjected to burst loss, delayed transitions, spurious toggles and cross-feature inconsistencies inspired by communication errors. Robustness is measured using macro-F1, which gives equal weight to each class and is suitable for imbalanced multiclass evaluation. Our evaluation reveals a sharp failure-mode split: event-level corruptions reduce macro-F1 only slightly (greater than equal to 0.87 at L5), while temporal jitter collapses macro-F1 to 0.44-0.50 across GRU, LSTM, and Transformer encoder model.
| Comments: | 7 pages, 6 figures, under review Milcom 2026 |
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2607.28665 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2607.28665v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.28665
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bookmark
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — Machine Learning
-
Bankruptcy Prediction via Hybrid Resampling and Stacking Ensemble Techniques with Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)-Driven Analysis
Aug 24
-
Machine Learning and ARIMA Model Averaging for Adaptive Public Health Forecasting: Comparative Evaluation and an Ontario COVID-19 Case Study
Aug 24
-
From Thermal Preference Prediction to Adaptive Thermal Intervention: A Reinforcement Learning Approach Using Physiological and Environmental Sensing
Aug 24
-
BF1: A Causal Dyadic Sparse-Attention Retrofit for Efficient Long-Context Transformers
Aug 24
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.