[Paper Review] Towards a Consistent Terminology for Scenario-Based Development and Test Approaches for Automated Vehicles: A Proposal for a Structuring Framework, a Basic Vocabulary, and its Application

Markus Steimle, Till Menzel+1 more|arXiv (Cornell University)|Apr 19, 2021

Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety15 references4 citations

TL;DR

This paper proposes a structured terminology framework and a basic vocabulary for scenario-based development and testing of automated vehicles, using UML diagrams to clarify relationships between key terms like 'scenario', 'test specification', and 'test case'. The key contribution is a standardized, consistent terminology that reduces misunderstandings and supports research, application, and standardization in the field.

ABSTRACT

For the market launch of automated vehicles, ensuring and validating their safe behavior are central challenges. As possible solutions, scenario-based development and test approaches for automated vehicles are pursued, e.g., in the research projects aFAS, ENABLE-S3, PEGASUS, SET Level, and VVMethoden. A consistent terminology that contains at least the most important terms (e.g., scenario, test specification, and test case) is an essential prerequisite for researching, applying, and standardizing scenario-based development and test approaches for automated vehicles. Currently, there is no consistent and agreed-upon terminology. In our experience, this often leads to misunderstandings. This publication aims to contribute to a consistent terminology for scenario-based development and test approaches for automated vehicles. We propose a framework to structure this terminology. Additionally, we propose a basic vocabulary within this framework by identifying and describing terms that we consider important for an overview of such scenario-based development and test approaches. To visualize the relationships between the proposed terms and to resolve contradictions and inaccuracies within the terminology, we visualize the proposed terms with UML diagrams.

Motivation & Objective

• To address the lack of consistent terminology in scenario-based development and testing of automated vehicles.
• To reduce misunderstandings caused by ambiguous or conflicting use of terms in research and industry.
• To support the standardization of scenario-based approaches through a structured framework.
• To provide a foundational vocabulary for key terms such as scenario, test specification, and test case.
• To visualize term relationships using UML diagrams to clarify inconsistencies and improve clarity.

Proposed method

• Develop a structuring framework to organize terminology in scenario-based development and testing of automated vehicles.
• Identify and define a core set of essential terms considered fundamental for an overview of the domain.
• Use UML class diagrams to model relationships between terms and resolve conceptual inconsistencies.
• Apply the framework and vocabulary to real-world research projects such as aFAS, ENABLE-S3, PEGASUS, SET Level, and VVMethoden.
• Validate the framework’s clarity and utility through analysis of existing terminology use in ongoing projects.
• Ensure the terminology supports interoperability, research collaboration, and future standardization.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How can a consistent and unambiguous terminology be established for scenario-based development and testing of automated vehicles?
• RQ2 What core terms are essential for describing scenario-based development and test approaches in automated vehicles?
• RQ3 How can relationships between key terms be visualized to resolve conceptual inconsistencies?
• RQ4 To what extent does the proposed framework improve clarity and reduce ambiguity compared to current terminology practices?
• RQ5 How can the framework support standardization and interoperability across research and industry initiatives?

Key findings

• The proposed framework provides a structured foundation for organizing terminology in scenario-based development and testing of automated vehicles.
• A basic vocabulary of essential terms has been identified and formally defined to support consistent communication.
• UML diagrams effectively visualize relationships between terms and resolve ambiguities present in existing terminology.
• The framework reduces the risk of misunderstandings in collaborative research and industrial applications.
• The approach enables better alignment across major research projects such as aFAS, ENABLE-S3, PEGASUS, SET Level, and VVMethoden.
• The terminology supports the path toward standardization of scenario-based testing in automated vehicle development.