arXiv:2610.38628v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Simulation is essential for testing automated driving systems (ADS), but discrepancies between simulation and reality can undermine testing conclusions. It remains unclear which discrepancies the literature addresses and what evidence supports correspondence claims. We present a systematic mapping of 235 primary studies that measure or mitigate the reality gap in ADS testing, selected from 4,195 publications. We characterise objectives, targets, approaches, experimental setups, and evaluation evidence. Our classification distinguishes simulated and real-world execution across six ADS test components, separately for each approach and its evaluation reference. This distinguishes real-world information used to construct an approach from evidence used to evaluate its claims. Of the included studies, 76% address mitigation, primarily targeting scenario and actor realism and perception, while 94% report validation or measurement procedures. Only 61 studies report metrics from multiple families covering sensor/perception correspondence, ADS behaviour, vehicle dynamics, or safety outcomes; this coverage does not establish causal links between discrepancies and test verdicts. The synthesis highlights that real-world content and physical execution must be interpreted against the claim evaluated. The findings motivate claim-specific evaluation and component-level reporting to establish which discrepancies affect testing conclusions and when simulation evidence supports conclusions about real-world ADS behaviour.
Continue to arXiv Software Engineering →You are being forwarded in 6s — stay on this page