Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
102 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
6 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Risk Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems based on Causal Bayesian Networks (2405.16063v1)

Published 25 May 2024 in cs.SE

Abstract: Advancements in Autonomous Driving Systems (ADS) have brought significant benefits, but also raised concerns regarding their safety. Virtual tests are common practices to ensure the safety of ADS because they are more efficient and safer compared to field operational tests. However, capturing the complex dynamics of real-world driving environments and effectively generating risk scenarios for testing is challenging. In this paper, we propose a novel paradigm shift towards utilizing Causal Bayesian Networks (CBN) for scenario generation in ADS. The CBN is built and validated using Maryland accident data, providing a deeper insight into the myriad factors influencing autonomous driving behaviors. Based on the constructed CBN, we propose an algorithm that significantly enhances the process of risk scenario generation, leading to more effective and safer ADS. An end-to-end testing framework for ADS is established utilizing the CARLA simulator. Through experiments, we successfully generated 89 high-risk scenarios from 5 seed scenarios, outperforming baseline methods in terms of time and iterations required.

View on arXiv
Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (44)
  1. 2024. Benchmark Reports - Pages — mva.maryland.gov. https://mva.maryland.gov/safety/Pages/mhso/benchmark-reports.aspx. [Accessed 11-01-2024].
  2. 2024. Crash Data - Catalog — catalog.data.gov. https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/crash-data. [Accessed 11-01-2024].
  3. 2024. Home — Calderdale Data Works — dataworks.calderdale.gov.uk. https://dataworks.calderdale.gov.uk/. [Accessed 11-01-2024].
  4. Ontology based Scene Creation for the Development of Automated Vehicles. In 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). 1813–1820. https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2018.8500632
  5. Baidu. 2024. Apollo; — apollo.baidu.com. https://apollo.baidu.com/. [Accessed 11-01-2024].
  6. DoWhy-GCM: An extension of DoWhy for causal inference in graphical causal models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.06821 (2022).
  7. Generating Avoidable Collision Scenarios for Testing Autonomous Driving Systems. In 2020 IEEE 13th International Conference on Software Testing, Validation and Verification (ICST). 375–386. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICST46399.2020.00045
  8. Risk Assessment Methodologies for Autonomous Driving: A Survey. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 23, 10 (Oct. 2022), 16923–16939. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2022.3163747
  9. Towards an Ontology for Scenario Definition for the Assessment of Automated Vehicles: An Object-Oriented Framework. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles 7, 2 (2022), 300–314. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2022.3144803
  10. A Survey on Safety-Critical Driving Scenario Generation—A Methodological Perspective. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 24, 7 (July 2023), 6971–6988. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2023.3259322
  11. CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulator. In Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Robot Learning (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 78), Sergey Levine, Vincent Vanhoucke, and Ken Goldberg (Eds.). PMLR, 1–16. https://proceedings.mlr.press/v78/dosovitskiy17a.html
  12. Testing Scenario Library Generation for Connected and Automated Vehicles, Part I: Methodology. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 22, 3 (March 2021), 1573–1582. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2020.2972211
  13. Dense Reinforcement Learning for Safety Validation of Autonomous Vehicles. Nature 615, 7953 (March 2023), 620–627. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-05732-2
  14. Generating effective test cases for self-driving cars from police reports. In Proceedings of the 2019 27th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (Tallinn, Estonia) (ESEC/FSE 2019). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1145/3338906.3338942
  15. Dan Geiger and David Heckerman. 1994. Learning Gaussian Networks. In Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Ramon Lopez de Mantaras and David Poole (Eds.). Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (CA), 235–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-55860-332-5.50035-3
  16. Is it Safe to Drive? An Overview of Factors, Metrics, and Datasets for Driveability Assessment in Autonomous Driving. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems 21, 8 (2020), 3135–3151. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2019.2926042
  17. Camilo Gutierrez-Osorio and César Pedraza. 2020. Modern data sources and techniques for analysis and forecast of road accidents: A review. Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering (English Edition) 7, 4 (2020), 432–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtte.2020.05.002
  18. Doppelgänger Test Generation for Revealing Bugs in Autonomous Driving Software. In 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 2591–2603. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE48619.2023.00216
  19. ISO 26262. 2018. Road Vehicles Functional Safety. https://www.iso.org/standard/68383.html
  20. ISO 34501. 2022. Test scenarios for automated driving systems Vocabulary. https://www.iso.org/standard/78950.html
  21. ISO/PAS 21448. 2022. Road Vehicles Safety of the Intended Functionality. https://www.iso.org/standard/77490.html
  22. Testing and Validation of Automotive Point-Cloud Sensors in Adverse Weather Conditions. Applied Sciences 9, 11 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3390/app9112341
  23. Scenario-Based Extended HARA Incorporating Functional Safety & SOTIF for Autonomous Driving. 59 pages. https://doi.org/10.3850/978-981-14-8593-0_5225-cd
  24. DriveFuzz: Discovering Autonomous Driving Bugs through Driving Quality-Guided Fuzzing. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1753–1767. https://doi.org/10.1145/3548606.3560558
  25. AV-FUZZER: Finding Safety Violations in Autonomous Driving Systems. In 2020 IEEE 31st International Symposium on Software Reliability Engineering (ISSRE). 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSRE5003.2020.00012
  26. Data-Driven Bayesian Network for Risk Analysis of Global Maritime Accidents. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 230 (Feb. 2023), 108938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2022.108938
  27. Validation and Verification in Domain-Specific Modeling Method Engineering: An Integrated Life-Cycle View. Software and Systems Modeling 22, 2 (April 2023), 647–666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-022-01056-3
  28. From Functional to Logical Scenarios: Detailing a Keyword-Based Scenario Description for Execution in a Simulation Environment. 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) (2019). https://doi.org/10.1109/IVS.2019.8814099
  29. Scenario Based Testing of Automated Driving Systems: A Literature Survey. https://doi.org/10.46720/f2020-acm-096
  30. Methods and tools for causal discovery and causal inference. In WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, Vol. 12. https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1449
  31. Methods and Tools for Causal Discovery and Causal Inference. WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery 12, 2 (2022), e1449. https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1449
  32. Judea Pearl and Dana Mackenzie. 2018. The Book of Why. Basic Books, New York.
  33. SAE. 2018. Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for on-Road Motor Vehicles. Online. https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201806/
  34. Mind the Gap! A Study on the Transferability of Virtual Versus Physical-World Testing of Autonomous Driving Systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 49, 4 (2023), 1928–1940. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2022.3202311
  35. LawBreaker: An Approach for Specifying Traffic Laws and Fuzzing Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 37th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (Rocheste, USA) (ASE ’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 62, 12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3551349.3556897
  36. A Survey on Automated Driving System Testing: Landscapes and Trends. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 32, 5 (July 2023), 124:1–124:62. https://doi.org/10.1145/3579642
  37. DeepTest: automated testing of deep-neural-network-driven autonomous cars. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering (Gothenburg, Sweden) (ICSE ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 303–314. https://doi.org/10.1145/3180155.3180220
  38. Risk Scenario Generation for Autonomous Driving Systems Based on Scenario Evaluation Model. In 2023 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN54540.2023.10191164
  39. Deep Reinforcement Learning: A Survey. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2022), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2022.3207346
  40. Waymo. 2024. Open Dataset – Waymo — waymo.com. https://waymo.com/open/. [Accessed 11-01-2024].
  41. Wider or Deeper: Revisiting the ResNet Model for Visual Recognition. Pattern Recognition 90 (2019), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2019.01.006
  42. A Survey on Causal Discovery: Theory and Practice. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 151 (2022), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2022.09.004
  43. DeepRoad: GAN-based metamorphic testing and input validation framework for autonomous driving systems. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (Montpellier, France) (ASE ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 132–142. https://doi.org/10.1145/3238147.3238187
  44. DeepBillboard: systematic physical-world testing of autonomous driving systems. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering (Seoul, South Korea) (ICSE ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 347–358. https://doi.org/10.1145/3377811.3380422
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (4)
  1. Jiangnan Zhao (3 papers)
  2. Dehui Du (11 papers)
  3. Xing Yu (15 papers)
  4. Hang Li (277 papers)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets