Scenario Description Language for Automated Driving Systems: A Two Level Abstraction Approach

The complexities associated with Automated Driving Systems (ADSs) and their interaction with the environment pose a challenge for their safety evaluation. Number of miles driven has been suggested as one of the metrics to demonstrate technological maturity. However, the experiences or the scenarios encountered by the ADSs is a more meaningful metric, and has led to a shift to scenario-based testing approach in the automotive industry and research community. Variety of scenario generation techniques have been advocated, including real-world data analysis, accident data analysis and via systems hazard analysis. While scenario generation can be done via these methods, there is a need for a scenario description language format which enables the exchange of scenarios between diverse stakeholders (as part of the systems engineering lifecycle) with varied usage requirements. In this paper, we propose a two-level abstraction approach to scenario description language (SDL) – SDL level 1 and SDL level 2. SDL level 1 is a textual description of the scenario at a higher abstraction level to be used by regulators or system engineers. SDL level 2 is a formal machine-readable language which is ingested by testing platform e.g. simulation or test track. One can transform a scenario in SDL level 1 into SDL level 2 by adding more details or from SDL level 2 to SDL level 1 by abstracting.

[1]  Sarah Sharples,et al.  Impact of automation: Measurement of performance, workload and behaviour in a complex control environment. , 2015, Applied ergonomics.

[2]  Collin McMillan,et al.  Detecting Vague Words & Phrases in Requirements Documents in a Multilingual Environment , 2017, 2017 IEEE 25th International Requirements Engineering Conference (RE).

[3]  Julius Ziegler,et al.  Lanelets: Efficient map representation for autonomous driving , 2014, 2014 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium Proceedings.

[4]  Nidhi Kalra,et al.  Driving to Safety , 2016 .

[5]  Stewart A. Birrell,et al.  The Science of Testing: An Automotive Perspective , 2018 .

[6]  Pallab Dasgupta,et al.  Identification of Test Cases for Automated Driving Systems Using Bayesian Optimization , 2019, 2019 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC).

[7]  Daniel J. Fagnant,et al.  Preparing a Nation for Autonomous Vehicles: Opportunities, Barriers and Policy Recommendations , 2015 .

[8]  Fabian Schuldt,et al.  Defining and Substantiating the Terms Scene, Situation, and Scenario for Automated Driving , 2015, 2015 IEEE 18th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[9]  Bart De Schutter,et al.  Ontology for Scenarios for the Assessment of Automated Vehicles , 2020, ArXiv.

[10]  Martin Strobl,et al.  OpenDRIVE 2010 and Beyond -Status and future of the de facto standard for the description of road networks , 2010 .

[11]  Kara M. Kockelman,et al.  The Travel and Environmental Implications of Shared Autonomous Vehicles, Using Agent-Based Model Scenarios , 2014 .

[12]  Fangfang Zheng,et al.  Automated cars: Queue discharge at signalized intersections with ‘Assured-Clear-Distance-Ahead’ driving strategies , 2016 .

[13]  Hermann Winner,et al.  Concept and development of a unified ontology for generating test and use-case catalogues for assisted and automated vehicle guidance , 2014 .

[14]  Bernhard Rumpe,et al.  Textbased Modeling , 2014, ArXiv.

[15]  Reinhard German,et al.  Advantageous Usage of Textual Domain-Specific Languages for Scenario-Driven Development of Automated Driving Functions , 2019, 2019 IEEE International Systems Conference (SysCon).

[16]  Krzysztof Czarnecki,et al.  GeoScenario: An Open DSL for Autonomous Driving Scenario Representation , 2019, 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[17]  Erwin de Gelder,et al.  Assessment of Automated Driving Systems using real-life scenarios , 2017, 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[18]  Markus Maurer,et al.  From Functional to Logical Scenarios: Detailing a Keyword-Based Scenario Description for Execution in a Simulation Environment , 2019, 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[19]  Paul A. Jennings,et al.  Identifying a gap in existing validation methodologies for intelligent automotive systems: Introducing the 3xD simulator , 2015, 2015 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[20]  Germán Ros,et al.  CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulator , 2017, CoRL.

[21]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  Automatic Conversion of Road Networks from OpenDRIVE to Lanelets , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics, and Informatics (SOLI).

[22]  Markus Maurer,et al.  Scenarios for Development, Test and Validation of Automated Vehicles , 2018, 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[23]  David Filliat,et al.  Ontology-based context awareness for driving assistance systems , 2014, 2014 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium Proceedings.

[24]  Markus Maurer,et al.  Ontology based Scene Creation for the Development of Automated Vehicles , 2017, 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[25]  Daniel Krajzewicz,et al.  SUMO - Simulation of Urban MObility An Overview , 2011 .

[26]  Edward A. Lee,et al.  Modeling Cyber–Physical Systems , 2012, Proceedings of the IEEE.