Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Off-Road Autonomy Validation Using Scalable Digital Twin Simulations Within High-Performance Computing Clusters

Published 8 May 2024 in cs.RO and cs.DC | (2405.04743v2)

Abstract: Off-road autonomy validation presents unique challenges due to the unpredictable and dynamic nature of off-road environments. Traditional methods focusing on sequentially sweeping across the parameter space for variability analysis struggle to comprehensively assess the performance and safety of off-road autonomous systems within the imposed time constraints. This paper proposes leveraging scalable digital twin simulations within high-performance computing (HPC) clusters to address this challenge. By harnessing the computational power of HPC clusters, our approach aims to provide a scalable and efficient means to validate off-road autonomy algorithms, enabling rapid iteration and testing of autonomy algorithms under various conditions. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework through performance evaluations of the HPC cluster in terms of simulation parallelization and present the systematic variability analysis of a candidate off-road autonomy algorithm to identify potential vulnerabilities in the autonomy stack's perception, planning and control modules.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (59)
  1. H.-P. Schöner, “Simulation in Development and Testing of Autonomous Vehicles,” in 18. Internationales Stuttgarter Symposium, M. Bargende, H.-C. Reuss, and J. Wiedemann, Eds.   Wiesbaden: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2018, pp. 1083–1095.
  2. W. Huang, K. Wang, Y. Lv, and F. Zhu, “Autonomous Vehicles Testing Methods Review,” in 2016 IEEE 19th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 2016, pp. 163–168.
  3. “Road Vehicles - Functional Safety,” Geneva, CH, 2018.
  4. C. Samak, T. Samak, and V. Krovi, “Towards Mechatronics Approach of System Design, Verification and Validation for Autonomous Vehicles,” in 2023 IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM), 2023, pp. 1208–1213. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/AIM46323.2023.10196233
  5. T. V. Samak, C. V. Samak, and V. N. Krovi, “Towards Validation of Autonomous Vehicles Across Scales using an Integrated Digital Twin Framework,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.12670
  6. C. V. Samak and T. V. Samak, “Autonomy Oriented Digital Twins for Real2Sim2Real Autoware Deployment,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2402.14739
  7. C. Samak, T. Samak, and V. Krovi, “Towards Sim2Real Transfer of Autonomy Algorithms using AutoDRIVE Ecosystem,” IFAC-PapersOnLine, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 277–282, 2023, 3rd Modeling, Estimation and Control Conference MECC 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405896323023704
  8. T. Samak, C. Samak, and S. Kandhasamy, “Robust Behavioral Cloning for Autonomous Vehicles Using End-to-End Imitation Learning,” SAE Intl. J CAV, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 279–295, Aug 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.4271/12-04-03-0023
  9. P. Koopman and M. Wagner, “Challenges in Autonomous Vehicle Testing and Validation,” SAE Int. J. Trans. Safety, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 15–24, Jan 2016. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-0128
  10. E. Cayirci, “Modeling and Simulation as a Cloud Service: A Survey,” in 2013 Winter Simulations Conference (WSC), 2013, pp. 389–400.
  11. D. Procházka and J. Hodický, “Modelling and Simulation as a Service and Concept Development and Experimentation,” in 2017 International Conference on Military Technologies (ICMT), 2017, pp. 721–727.
  12. Ansys Inc., “Ansys Automotive,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ansys.com/solutions/solutions-by-industry/automotive
  13. MSC Software Corporation, “Adams Car,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.mscsoftware.com/product/adams-car
  14. Ansys Inc., “Ansys Autonomy,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.ansys.com/solutions/technology-trends/autonomous-engineering
  15. Mechanical Simulation Corporation, “CarSim,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.carsim.com
  16. IPG Automotive GmbH, “CarMaker,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://ipg-automotive.com/products-services/simulation-software/carmaker
  17. Nvidia Corporation, “NVIDIA DRIVE Sim and DRIVE Constellation,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/self-driving-cars/drive-constellation
  18. Cognata Ltd., “Cognata,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.cognata.com
  19. rFpro, “Driving Simulation,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.rfpro.com/driving-simulation
  20. dSPACE, “dSPACE,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.dspace.com/en/pub/home.cfm
  21. Siemens AG, “PreScan,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://tass.plm.automation.siemens.com/prescan
  22. S. R. Richter, V. Vineet, S. Roth, and V. Koltun, “Playing for Data: Ground Truth from Computer Games,” in Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), ser. LNCS, J. Matas, B. Leibe, M. Welling, and N. Sebe, Eds., vol. 9906.   Springer International Publishing, 13-15 Nov 2016, pp. 102–118.
  23. S. R. Richter, Z. Hayder, and V. Koltun, “Playing for Benchmarks,” in IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, ICCV 2017, Venice, Italy, October 22-29, 2017, 2017, pp. 2232–2241.
  24. M. Johnson-Roberson, C. Barto, R. Mehta, S. N. Sridhar, K. Rosaen, and R. Vasudevan, “Driving in the Matrix: Can Virtual Worlds Replace Human-Generated Annotations for Real World Tasks?” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2017, pp. 746–753.
  25. N. P. Koenig and A. Howard, “Design and Use Paradigms for Gazebo, an Open-Source Multi-Robot Simulator,” in 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37566), vol. 3, 2004, pp. 2149–2154.
  26. M. Quigley, K. Conley, B. Gerkey, J. Faust, T. Foote, J. Leibs, R. Wheeler, and A. Ng, “ROS: An Open-Source Robot Operating System,” in ICRA 2009 Workshop on Open Source Software, vol. 3, Jan 2009. [Online]. Available: http://robotics.stanford.edu/~ang/papers/icraoss09-ROS.pdf
  27. B. Wymann, E. Espié, C. Guionneau, C. Dimitrakakis, R. Coulom, and A. Sumner, “TORCS, The Open Racing Car Simulator,” 2021. [Online]. Available: http://torcs.sourceforge.net
  28. 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, ser. Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, S. Levine, V. Vanhoucke, and K. Goldberg, Eds., vol. 78.   PMLR, 13-15 Nov 2017, pp. 1–16.
  29. S. Shah, D. Dey, C. Lovett, and A. Kapoor, “AirSim: High-Fidelity Visual and Physical Simulation for Autonomous Vehicles,” in Field and Service Robotics, M. Hutter and R. Siegwart, Eds.   Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018, pp. 621–635.
  30. Voyage, “Deepdrive,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://deepdrive.voyage.auto
  31. Epic Games Inc., “Unreal Engine,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.unrealengine.com
  32. Baidu Inc., “Apollo Game Engine Based Simulator,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://developer.apollo.auto/gamesim.html
  33. G. Rong, B. H. Shin, H. Tabatabaee, Q. Lu, S. Lemke, M. Možeiko, E. Boise, G. Uhm, M. Gerow, S. Mehta, E. Agafonov, T. H. Kim, E. Sterner, K. Ushiroda, M. Reyes, D. Zelenkovsky, and S. Kim, “LGSVL Simulator: A High Fidelity Simulator for Autonomous Driving,” in 2020 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 2020, pp. 1–6.
  34. TIER IV Inc., “AWSIM,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://tier4.github.io/AWSIM
  35. Unity Technologies, “Unity,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://unity.com
  36. T. V. Samak, C. V. Samak, and M. Xie, “AutoDRIVE Simulator: A Simulator for Scaled Autonomous Vehicle Research and Education,” in 2021 2nd International Conference on Control, Robotics and Intelligent System, ser. CCRIS’21.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 1–5. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3483845.3483846
  37. T. V. Samak and C. V. Samak, “AutoDRIVE Simulator – Technical Report,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.07022
  38. W. Tsai, X. Bai, and Y. Huang, “Software-as-a-Service (SaaS): Perspectives and Challenges,” Science China Information Sciences, vol. 57, pp. 1–15, 2014.
  39. B. Gupta, P. Mittal, and T. Mufti, “A Review on Amazon Web Service (AWS), Microsoft Azure & Google Cloud Platform (GCP) Services,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on ICT for Digital, Smart, and Sustainable Development, ICIDSSD 2020, 27-28 February 2020, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, India, 2021.
  40. Science and T. O. N. A. T. O. N. sur Seine Cedex France, “Modelling and Simulation as a Service, Volume 4: Experimentation Report,” 2019.
  41. M. Franchi, R. Kahn, M. Chowdhury, S. Khan, K. Kennedy, L. Ngo, and A. Apon, “Webots.HPC: A Parallel Simulation Pipeline for Autonomous Vehicles,” in Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing, 2022, pp. 1–4.
  42. T. Kubernetes, “Kubernetes,” Kubernetes. Retrieved May, vol. 24, p. 2019, 2019.
  43. D. Merkel, “Docker: Lightweight Linux Containers for Consistent Development and Deployment,” Linux Journal, vol. 2014, no. 239, p. 2, 2014.
  44. G. M. Kurtzer, V. Sochat, and M. Bauer, “Singularity: Scientific Containers for Mobility of Compute,” Plos One, vol. 12, p. e0177459, 2017.
  45. M. Fogli, C. Giannelli, F. Poltronieri, C. Stefanelli, and M. Tortonesi, “Chaos Engineering for Resilience Assessment of Digital Twins,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 2023.
  46. K. Rehman, O. Kipouridis, S. Karnouskos, O. Frendo, H. Dickel, J. Lipps, and N. Verzano, “A Cloud-Based Development Environment using HLA and Kubernetes for the Co-Simulation of a Corporate Electric Vehicle Fleet,” in 2019 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (SII).   IEEE, 2019, pp. 47–54.
  47. M. G. Khan, J. Taheri, A. Al-Dulaimy, and A. Kassler, “PerfSim: A Performance Simulator for Cloud Native Microservice Chains,” IEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1395–1413, 2021.
  48. T. Samak, C. Samak, S. Kandhasamy, V. Krovi, and M. Xie, “AutoDRIVE: A Comprehensive, Flexible and Integrated Digital Twin Ecosystem for Autonomous Driving Research & Education,” Robotics, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 77, May 2023. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/robotics12030077
  49. T. V. Samak and C. V. Samak, “AutoDRIVE – Technical Report,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.08475
  50. Mathworks Inc., “RoadRunner,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.mathworks.com/products/roadrunner.html
  51. Association for Standardization of Automation and Measuring Systems (ASAM), “OpenSCENARIO,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/openscenario
  52. ——, “OpenDRIVE,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.asam.net/standards/detail/opendrive
  53. Unity Technologies, “Unity Terrain,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://docs.unity3d.com/Manual/script-Terrain.html
  54. S. Tomar, “Converting Video Formats with FFmpeg,” Linux Journal, vol. 2006, no. 146, p. 10, 2006.
  55. N. Corporation, “NVIDIA Data Center Documentation,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://docs.nvidia.com/datacenter/tesla/mig-user-guide/index.html#app-considerations
  56. J. Redmon, S. Divvala, R. Girshick, and A. Farhadi, “You Only Look Once: Unified, Real-Time Object Detection,” in 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2016, pp. 779–788.
  57. J. Redmon and A. Farhadi, “YOLO9000: Better, Faster, Stronger,” in 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2017, pp. 6517–6525.
  58. ——, “YOLOv3: An Incremental Improvement,” 2018.
  59. C. V. Samak, T. V. Samak, and S. Kandhasamy, “Control Strategies for Autonomous Vehicles,” in Autonomous Driving and Advanced Driver-Assistance Systems (ADAS).   CRC Press, 2021, pp. 37–86.

Summary

  • The paper presents a scalable, open-source framework using digital twin simulations within high-performance computing clusters to validate off-road autonomous vehicles efficiently.
  • A case study on an autonomous emergency braking algorithm demonstrates the framework's utility, achieving a seven-fold reduction in simulation execution time via parallelization on 128 test cases.
  • Systematic variability analysis identified algorithm vulnerabilities and performance differences using various perception models, offering crucial insights for enhancing robustness and reliability in complex off-road settings.

Off-Road Autonomy Validation Using Scalable Digital Twin Simulations Within High-Performance Computing Clusters: An Expert Analysis

The paper presents an advanced methodological framework for validating off-road autonomous vehicle systems. It highlights the challenges in assessing autonomous off-road vehicle performance due to the dynamic nature and unpredictability of off-road environments. To tackle these challenges, the paper proposes the use of scalable digital twin simulations, deployed within high-performance computing (HPC) clusters, to facilitate rapid iteration and comprehensive testing of autonomy algorithms.

Key Contributions and Results

The study makes several significant contributions. First, it presents a modular, open-source framework that leverages the computational power of HPC clusters for the scalability and efficiency of simulations. This framework includes the development of a high-fidelity and photorealistic digital twin simulation environment specifically tailored for off-road autonomous vehicles. The research demonstrates the setup of a cloud infrastructure to enable the elastic orchestration of containerized simulation instances and offers an interactive interface for the real-time monitoring and analysis of simulation results.

The utility of the framework is illustrated through a case study focusing on a vision-guided autonomous emergency braking (AEB) algorithm for a light tactical vehicle (LTV) in an off-road environment. The framework's efficacy is further demonstrated by executing 128 parallel simulation test cases. Results indicate substantial performance improvements: simulation execution time was reduced by a factor of seven when using parallelization, which inherently highlights the framework's efficiency in leveraging HPC resources.

Computational Analysis

The study conducted detailed computational analysis to evaluate HPC resource utilization across varying levels of parallel simulation workloads. This analysis revealed an approximately linear scaling in memory consumption corresponding to the number of parallel simulations, while CPU and GPU usage presented non-linear trends. This insight underscores the enhanced resource management capabilities within an HPC framework as opposed to traditional sequential testing approaches.

Variability Analysis and Validation

The paper also encapsulates a systematic variability analysis of an autonomy algorithm, identifying potential vulnerabilities within its perception, planning, and control modules. By utilizing multiple perception models (e.g., YOLOv2, YOLOv3, and their variants), the approach emphasizes robustness by spanning a diverse set of environmental conditions. The results demonstrate a performance gradient, with YOLOv3 achieving the highest overall test success rate. This variability analysis is crucial for understanding and refining the performance boundaries and error tolerances of autonomy algorithms deployed in complex off-road settings.

Implications and Future Research Directions

The implications of this research are manifold. Practically, it ensures more efficient resource usage through cloud-based simulations, reducing both time and costs, while theoretically, it paves the way for more complex autonomy validation paradigms in dynamic environments.

Future research directions proposed by the paper include integrating hardware-in-the-loop (HiL) and vehicle-in-the-loop (ViL) testing frameworks to further elevate the authenticity of digital twin simulations. Additionally, the concept of automated parameter tuning for autonomy algorithms, using insights from systematic validation, represents a promising avenue for enhancing the accuracy and reliability of autonomous systems.

Overall, this work positions itself as a substantial contribution to the field of autonomous vehicle validation, particularly within challenging off-road environments. By marrying cutting-edge computational resources with sophisticated simulation frameworks, the study lays a comprehensive foundation for the advancement of off-road autonomy.

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.