Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

What Matters to Enhance Traffic Rule Compliance of Imitation Learning for End-to-End Autonomous Driving

Published 14 Sep 2023 in cs.CV, cs.AI, cs.LG, and cs.RO | (2309.07808v3)

Abstract: End-to-end autonomous driving, where the entire driving pipeline is replaced with a single neural network, has recently gained research attention because of its simpler structure and faster inference time. Despite this appealing approach largely reducing the complexity in the driving pipeline, it also leads to safety issues because the trained policy is not always compliant with the traffic rules. In this paper, we proposed P-CSG, a penalty-based imitation learning approach with contrastive-based cross semantics generation sensor fusion technologies to increase the overall performance of end-to-end autonomous driving. In this method, we introduce three penalties - red light, stop sign, and curvature speed penalty to make the agent more sensitive to traffic rules. The proposed cross semantics generation helps to align the shared information of different input modalities. We assessed our model's performance using the CARLA Leaderboard - Town 05 Long Benchmark and Longest6 Benchmark, achieving 8.5% and 2.0% driving score improvement compared to the baselines. Furthermore, we conducted robustness evaluations against adversarial attacks like FGSM and Dot attacks, revealing a substantial increase in robustness compared to other baseline models. More detailed information can be found at https://hk-zh.github.io/p-csg-plus.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (28)
  1. A. Tampuu, T. Matiisen, M. Semikin, D. Fishman, and N. Muhammad, “A survey of end-to-end driving: Architectures and training methods,” IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 1364–1384, 2022.
  2. B. D. Argall, S. Chernova, M. Veloso, and B. Browning, “A survey of robot learning from demonstration,” Robotics and Autonomous Systems, vol. 57, no. 5, pp. 469–483, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921889008001772
  3. P. Cai, S. Wang, H. Wang, and M. Liu, “Carl-lead: Lidar-based end-to-end autonomous driving with contrastive deep reinforcement learning,” CoRR, vol. abs/2109.08473, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.08473
  4. A. Sadat, S. Casas, M. Ren, X. Wu, P. Dhawan, and R. Urtasun, “Perceive, predict, and plan: Safe motion planning through interpretable semantic representations,” CoRR, vol. abs/2008.05930, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.05930
  5. I. Sobh, L. Amin, S. Abdelkarim, K. Elmadawy, M. Saeed, O. Abdeltawab, M. Gamal, and A. El Sallab, “End-to-end multi-modal sensors fusion system for urban automated driving,” 2018.
  6. K. Chitta, A. Prakash, B. Jaeger, Z. Yu, K. Renz, and A. Geiger, “Transfuser: Imitation with transformer-based sensor fusion for autonomous driving,” Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI), 2022.
  7. H. Shao, L. Wang, R. Chen, H. Li, and Y. Liu, “Safety-enhanced autonomous driving using interpretable sensor fusion transformer,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.14024, 2022.
  8. D. Chen and P. Krähenbühl, “Learning from all vehicles,” 2022.
  9. D. Xu, D. Anguelov, and A. Jain, “Pointfusion: Deep sensor fusion for 3d bounding box estimation,” 2018.
  10. L. Xie, C. Xiang, Z. Yu, G. Xu, Z. Yang, D. Cai, and X. He, “Pi-rcnn: An efficient multi-sensor 3d object detector with point-based attentive cont-conv fusion module,” Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 34, no. 07, pp. 12 460–12 467, Apr. 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AAAI/article/view/6933
  11. V. A. Sindagi, Y. Zhou, and O. Tuzel, “Mvx-net: Multimodal voxelnet for 3d object detection,” in 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2019, pp. 7276–7282.
  12. J. H. Yoo, Y. Kim, J. Kim, and J. W. Choi, “3d-cvf: Generating joint camera and lidar features using cross-view spatial feature fusion for 3d object detection,” in Computer Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XXVII 16.   Springer, 2020, pp. 720–736.
  13. H. Zhu, J. Deng, Y. Zhang, J. Ji, Q. Mao, H. Li, and Y. Zhang, “Vpfnet: Improving 3d object detection with virtual point based lidar and stereo data fusion,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 2022.
  14. C. Wang, C. Ma, M. Zhu, and X. Yang, “Pointaugmenting: Cross-modal augmentation for 3d object detection,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 11 794–11 803.
  15. S. Fadadu, S. Pandey, D. Hegde, Y. Shi, F.-C. Chou, N. Djuric, and C. Vallespi-Gonzalez, “Multi-view fusion of sensor data for improved perception and prediction in autonomous driving,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Winter Conference on Applications of Computer Vision, 2022, pp. 2349–2357.
  16. K. Chen, R. Oldja, N. Smolyanskiy, S. Birchfield, A. Popov, D. Wehr, I. Eden, and J. Pehserl, “Mvlidarnet: Real-time multi-class scene understanding for autonomous driving using multiple views,” in 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).   IEEE, 2020, pp. 2288–2294.
  17. X. Chen, H. Ma, J. Wan, B. Li, and T. Xia, “Multi-view 3d object detection network for autonomous driving,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2017, pp. 1907–1915.
  18. Y. Sun, W. Zuo, P. Yun, H. Wang, and M. Liu, “Fuseseg: Semantic segmentation of urban scenes based on rgb and thermal data fusion,” IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1000–1011, 2020.
  19. A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. N. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, and I. Polosukhin, “Attention is all you need,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 30, 2017.
  20. A. Prakash, K. Chitta, and A. Geiger, “Multi-modal fusion transformer for end-to-end autonomous driving,” in Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2021.
  21. A. Dosovitskiy, G. Ros, F. Codevilla, A. Lopez, and V. Koltun, “CARLA: An open urban driving simulator,” in Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Robot Learning, 2017, pp. 1–16.
  22. A. Filos, P. Tigkas, R. McAllister, N. Rhinehart, S. Levine, and Y. Gal, “Can autonomous vehicles identify, recover from, and adapt to distribution shifts?” in International Conference on Machine Learning.   PMLR, 2020, pp. 3145–3153.
  23. N. Rhinehart, R. McAllister, K. Kitani, and S. Levine, “Precog: Prediction conditioned on goals in visual multi-agent settings,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2019, pp. 2821–2830.
  24. D. Chen, B. Zhou, V. Koltun, and P. Krähenbühl, “Learning by cheating,” in Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL), 2019.
  25. K. He, X. Zhang, S. Ren, and J. Sun, “Deep residual learning for image recognition,” CoRR, vol. abs/1512.03385, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.03385
  26. D. Chen, V. Koltun, and P. Krähenbühl, “Learning to drive from a world on rails,” 2021.
  27. I. J. Goodfellow, J. Shlens, and C. Szegedy, “Explaining and harnessing adversarial examples,” 2015.
  28. J. Li, F. R. Schmidt, and J. Z. Kolter, “Adversarial camera stickers: A physical camera-based attack on deep learning systems,” 2019.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.