AI 中文总结
本文针对ADS安全保障中ODD规范与行为验证的差距，构建了涵盖三类运行域的21项行为能力分类学，结合标准验证并确定枢纽域需专项研究，为ADS行为测试提供场景基础。
AI 中文摘要
运行设计域（ODD）规范描述了自动驾驶系统（ADS）被允许运行的场景范围，但未规定ADS在该域内部署后必须明确执行的操作。这种运行条件规范与行为验证之间的差距，是ADS安全保障领域一个尚未解决的关键挑战。本文基于PEGASUS六层模型的ODD，系统构建了涵盖高速公路（HWY）、城市道路（URB）和枢纽（HUB）三个运行域的21项行为能力的结构化、符合标准的分类学。每项行为沿纵向和横向控制轴分解，并通过由安全（车距保持、冲突规避、运动学稳定性）、合规（法律法规与行为规范）、舒适（驾乘动态与信任）、效率（任务完成与产品级指标）构成的四维框架进行表征。我们进一步证明，ODD层参数化与行为能力规范的结合，可生成适用于系统行为测试和SOTIF覆盖证据的具体场景族。该分类学基于AVSC00008202111、SAE J3237和SAE J3016标准，并通过在规则约束的轨迹优化系统中的部署，被验证为一个可操作的规范层。枢纽域被确定为结构独特、规范不足的域，值得专门研究关注。
英文摘要
Operational Design Domain (ODD) specifications describe where an automated driving system (ADS) is permitted to operate, but they do not prescribe what the ADS must demonstrably do once deployed within that domain. This gap between operating condition specification and behavioral validation represents a critical unresolved challenge in ADS safety assurance. This paper presents a structured, standards-grounded taxonomy of 21 behavioral competencies organized across three operational domains-Highway (HWY), Urban (URB), and Hub (HUB)-derived systematically from the PEGASUS six-layer model-based ODD. Each behavior is decomposed along longitudinal and lateral control axes and characterized against a four-property framework: Safety (gap maintenance, conflict avoidance, kinematic stability), Compliance (legal rules and behavioral norms), Comfort (rider dynamics and trust), and Efficiency (mission completion and product-level metrics). We further demonstrate that the crossing of ODD layer parameterizations with behavioral competency specifications yields concrete scenario families suitable for systematic behavioral testing and SOTIF coverage evidence. The taxonomy is grounded in AVSC00008202111, SAE J3237, and SAE J3016, and is validated as an operational specification layer through its deployment in a rule-enforced trajectory optimization system. The Hub domain is identified as a structurally distinct, underspecified domain warranting dedicated research attention.
