ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
A Sensor-Centric Survey of Autonomous Driving: Integrating Measurement Physics, Uncertainty Modeling, and Safety-Critical Multi-Sensor Fusion.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Autonomous driving systems (ADSs) are reliable only when heterogeneous sensors, estimation algorithms, and safety mechanisms are engineered as a single coherent safety-critical measurement system rather than as loosely coupled modules. Production stacks integrate cameras, LiDAR, automotive radar, and GNSS/IMU, yet deployment remains constrained by modality-specific failure modes, calibration and synchronization drift, and out-of-distribution (OOD) conditions that violate modeling assumptions. These limitations induce overconfidence and downstream decision errors whenever planning assumes certainty sharper than sensing can justify. This survey introduces a sensor-centric framework linking measurement physics, uncertainty propagation, fusion integrity, safety assurance, and risk-aware planning and control. We formalize what each modality physically measures; unify probabilistic, evidential, and conformal uncertainty representations; analyze filtering, factor-graph, BEV, transformer, and state-space fusion architectures with an emphasis on robustness and graceful degradation; and generalize aviation-style integrity concepts (RAIM/ARAIM) to multi-modal autonomy. The distinctive contribution is a single sensor-to-assurance throughline in which every uncertainty representation is tied to its measurement physics, every fusion architecture is evaluated against an explicit integrity-monitoring requirement generalized from RAIM/ARAIM, and every safety-standard clause is mapped to a concrete architectural mechanism. We map these mechanisms onto ISO 26262, ISO 21448 (SOTIF), ISO/PAS 8800, ANSI/UL 4600, and the UNECE framework, and connect perception uncertainty to decision-making through chance-constrained MPC and formal safety filters (RSS, CBF). Industry case studies and emerging V2X and generative-simulation approaches close the loop to deployable safety arguments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.