Adaptive error injection for robustness verification of decision-making systems for autonomous vehicles

Abstract

Robustness of the decision-making system is essential to safe driving, especially under the environment with inevitable defective information due to the limitations of the perception and positioning modules. The traditional fault-injection approach is widely used in robustness tests, but it mainly focuses on the endogenous fault instead of the exogenous errors of systems. In this paper, a robustness verification method based on error injection is proposed for the decision-making system against exogenous data errors. First, an error model is designed to generate potential data errors for different environment information. Then, an error injection framework with high versatility is proposed to support different decision-making systems and virtual test platforms. In addition, an optimization algorithm called LAMBDA is introduced to adaptively design experiments aiming to realize a quick search of safety-critical errors. Furthermore, an error injection tool is developed to conduct the verification test automatically. The proposed approach is verified on a city autopilot system under typical hazardous scenarios by the error injection tool, and the tolerance boundary of the system can be obtained as well. Compared to random-based and traditional optimization algorithms, the LAMBDA algorithm is able to quickly achieve a higher coverage for safety-critical errors. Although the approach is proposed for the decision-making module, it is can be easily extended to others, such as planning and control.

Keywords

Autonomous vehicle decision-making system error injection test strategy safety of the intended functionality

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ISO 21448:2022. Road vehicles-safety of the intended functionality.

Riedmaier

Ponn

Ludwig

, et al. Survey on scenario-based safety assessment of automated vehicles. IEEE Access 2020; 8: 87456–87477.

Xiang

Xia

, et al. Opv2v: An open benchmark dataset and fusion pipeline for perception with vehicle-to-vehicle communication. In: 2022 International conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), Philadelphia, PA, 23–27 May 2022, pp.2583–2589. New York: IEEE.

Xia

Xiong

Huang

, et al. Estimation on IMU yaw misalignment by fusing information of automotive onboard sensors. Mech Syst Signal Process 2022; 162: 107993.

Xia

Hashemi

Xiong

, et al. Autonomous vehicle kinematics and dynamics synthesis for sideslip angle estimation based on consensus Kalman filter. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2023; 31(1): 179–192.

Xia

Xiong

, et al. Vehicle sideslip angle estimation by fusing inertial measurement unit and global navigation satellite system with heading alignment. Mech Syst Signal Process 2021; 150: 107290.

Salih

Satyanarayana

Alkalbani

, et al. A survey on software/hardware fault injection tools and techniques. In: 2022 IEEE Symposium on industrial electronics & applications (ISIEA), Langkawi Island, Malaysia, 16–17 July 2022, pp.1–7. New York: IEEE.

Rao

Pathrose

Huening

, et al. An approach for validating safety of perception software in autonomous driving systems. In: Model-based safety and assessment: 6th international symposium (IMBSA), Thessaloniki, Greece, 16–18 October 2019, pp.303–316. Berlin: Springer.

Ceccarelli

Secci

. RGB cameras failures and their effects in autonomous driving applications. IEEE Trans Dependable Secure Comput 2022; 1: 1–17.

10.

Kowalczyk

Bugiel

Szelest

, et al. Fault injection in optical path-detection quality degradation analysis with Wasserstein distance. In: 2021 25th International conference on methods and models in automation and robotics (MMAR), Miedzyzdroje, Poland, 23–26 August 2021, pp.121–126. New York: IEEE.

11.

Petit

Shladover

. Potential cyberattacks on automated vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 2014; 16(2): 546–556.

12.

Vedder

Svensson

Vinter

, et al. Automated testing of ultrawideband positioning for autonomous driving. J Robot 2020; 2020: 1–15.

13.

Tian

Pei

Jana

, et al. Deeptest: automated testing of deep-neural-network-driven autonomous cars. In 40th international conference on software engineering, Gothenburg, Sweden, 27 May–3 June 2018, pp.303–314. New York: ACM.

14.

Pei

Cao

Yang

, et al. Deepxplore: automated whitebox testing of deep learning systems. In: 26th Symposium on operating systems principles, Shanghai, China, 28 October 2017, pp.1–18. New York: ACM.

15.

Eykholt

Evtimov

Fernandes

, et al. Robust physical-world attacks on deep learning visual classification. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, Salt Lake City, UT, 18–23 June 2018, pp.1625–1634. New York: IEEE.

16.

Nurminen

Halvari

Harviainen

, et al. Software framework for data fault injection to test machine learning systems. In: 2019 IEEE international symposium on software reliability engineering workshops (ISSREW), Berlin, Germany, 27–30 October 2019, pp.294–299. New York: IEEE.

17.

Condia

JER

dos Santos

Reorda

, et al. Combining architectural simulation and software fault injection for a fast and accurate CNNs reliability evaluation on GPUs. In: 2021 IEEE 39th VLSI Test Symposium (VTS), San Diego, CA, 25–28 April 2021, pp.1–7. New York: IEEE.

18.

Terechko

Bijlsma

, et al. A retargetable fault injection framework for safety validation of autonomous vehicles. In: 2019 IEEE international conference on software architecture companion (ICSA-C), Irvine, CA, 13–16 November 2019, pp.69–76. New York: IEEE.

19.

Saraoglu

Morozov

Janschek

. MOBATSim: model-based autonomous traffic simulation framework for fault-error-failure chain analysis. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019; 52(8): 239–244.

20.

Munaro

Muntean

. Early assessment of system-level safety mechanisms through co-simulation-based fault injection. In: 2022 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), Aachen, Germany, 4–9 June 2022, pp.1703–1708. New York: IEEE.

21.

Jha

Banerjee

Tsai

, et al. ML-based fault injection for autonomous vehicles: A case for bayesian fault injection. In: 2019 49th annual IEEE/IFIP international conference on dependable systems and networks (DSN), Portland, OR, 24–27 June 2019, pp.112–124. New York: IEEE.

22.

Moradi

Oakes

Denil

. Machine learning-assisted fault injection. In: 39th International conference on computer safety, reliability and security, Lisbon, Portugal, 15–18 September 2020, pp.1–4. Lisbon: EWICS TC7.

23.

Moradi

Oakes

Saraoglu

, et al. Exploring fault parameter space using reinforcement learning-based fault injection. In: 2020 50th annual IEEE/IFIP international conference on dependable systems and networks workshops (DSN-W), Valencia, Spain, 29 June–2 July 2020, pp.102–109. New York: IEEE.

24.

Krček

Fronte

Picek

. On the importance of initial solutions selection in fault injection. In: 2021 Workshop on fault detection and tolerance in cryptography (FDTC), Milan, Italy, 17 September 2021, pp.1–12. New York: IEEE.

25.

Tuncali

Fainekos

Prokhorov

, et al. Requirements-driven test generation for autonomous vehicles with machine learning components. IEEE Trans Intell Vehicles 2020; 5(2): 265–280.

26.

Xing

Liu

, et al. Automatic testing method based on optimization algorithms for the decision and planning system of autonomous vehicles. Journal Tongji University 2021; 49(8): 1162–1169.

27.

Feng

Yan

Sun

, et al. Intelligent driving intelligence test for autonomous vehicles with naturalistic and adversarial environment. Nat Commun 2021; 12(1): 748.

28.

Norden

O’Kelly

Sinha

. Efficient black-box assessment of autonomous vehicle safety. ArXiv preprint 2019; ArXiv:1912.03618.

29.

Bagschik

Menzel

Maurer

. Ontology based scene creation for the development of automated vehicles. In: 2018 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), Changshu, China, 26–30 June 2018, pp.1813–1820. New York: IEEE.

30.

Holland

. Adaptation in natural and artificial systems: an introductory analysis with applications to biology, control, and artificial intelligence. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1992. pp.34–35.

31.

Storn

Price

. Differential evolution–a simple and efficient heuristic for global optimization over continuous spaces. J Glob Optim 1997; 11(4): 341–359.

32.

Pelikan

Goldberg

Tsutsui

. Hierarchical Bayesian optimization algorithm: toward a new generation of evolutionary algorithms. In: SICE 2003 annual conference (IEEE Cat. no. 03TH8734), Fukui, Japan, 4–6 August 2003, pp.2738–2743. New York: IEEE.

33.

Wang

Fonseca

Tian

. Learning search space partition for black-box optimization using monte carlo tree search. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 2020; 33: 19511–19522.

34.

Liu

Feng

Xing

, et al. LAMBDA: Covering the solution set of black-box inequality by search space quantization. arXiv preprint 2022; ArXiv:2203.13708.

35.

Vogel

. A comparison of headway and time to collision as safety indicators. Accid Anal Prev 2003; 35(3): 427–433.

36.

Wang

. Exploring the mechanism of crashes with automated vehicles using statistical modeling approaches. PLoS One 2019; 14(3): e0214550.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB