APEX: Autonomous Vehicle Plan Verification and Execution

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) have already driven millions of miles on public roads, but even the simplest scenarios have not been certified for safety. Current methodologies for the verification of AV's decision and control systems attempt to divorce the lower level, short-term trajectory planning and trajectory tracking functions from the behavioral rules-based framework that governs mid-term actions. Such analysis is typically predicated on the discretization of the state space and has several limitations. First, it requires that a conservative buffer be added around obstacles such that many feasible plans are classified as unsafe. Second, the discretized controllers modeled in this analysis require several refinement steps before being implementable on an actual AV, and typically do not allow the specification of comfort-related properties on the trajectories. In contrast, consumer-ready AVs use motion planning algorithms that generate smooth trajectories. While viable algorithms exist for the generation of smooth trajectories originating from a single state, analysis should consider that the AV faces state estimation errors and disturbances. Third, verification is restricted to a discretized state space with fixed-size cells; this assumption can artificially limit the set of available trajectories if the discretization is too coarse. Conversely, too fine of a discretization renders the problem intractable for automated analysis. This work presents a new verification tool, APEX, which investigates the combined action of a behavioral planner and state lattice-based motion planner to guarantee a safe vehicle trajectory is chosen. In APEX, decisions made at the behavioral layer can be traced through to the spatio-temporal evolution of the AV and verified. Thus, there is no need to create abstractions of the AV's controllers, and aggressive trajectories required for evasive maneuvers can be accurately investigated.

[1]  E. Gat On Three-Layer Architectures , 1997 .

[2]  Jarrod M. Snider Automatic Steering Methods for Autonomous Automobile Path Tracking , 2009 .

[3]  Rajesh Rajamani,et al.  Vehicle dynamics and control , 2005 .

[4]  Luke Fletcher,et al.  The MIT - Cornell Collision and Why It Happened , 2009, The DARPA Urban Challenge.

[5]  A. Kelly,et al.  TRAJECTORY GENERATION FOR CAR-LIKE ROBOTS USING CUBIC CURVATURE POLYNOMIALS , 2001 .

[6]  Wei Chen,et al.  Delta-Complete Analysis for Bounded Reachability of Hybrid Systems , 2014, ArXiv.

[7]  Ufuk Topcu,et al.  Formal Specification and Synthesis of Mission Plans for Unmanned Aerial Vehicles , 2014, AAAI Spring Symposia.

[8]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  The benefits of relaxing punctuality , 1991, PODC '91.

[9]  Anna Philippou,et al.  Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems , 2018, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[10]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  Online Verification of Automated Road Vehicles Using Reachability Analysis , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[11]  M. Mitchell Waldrop,et al.  Autonomous vehicles: No drivers required , 2015, Nature.

[12]  Thomas A. Henzinger,et al.  The Algorithmic Analysis of Hybrid Systems , 1995, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[13]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  Reachability computation of low-order models for the safety verification of high-order road vehicle models , 2012, 2012 American Control Conference (ACC).

[14]  Paulo Tabuada,et al.  Correct-by-Construction Adaptive Cruise Control: Two Approaches , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology.

[15]  Wei Chen,et al.  dReach: δ-Reachability Analysis for Hybrid Systems , 2015, TACAS.

[16]  William Whittaker,et al.  Autonomous driving in urban environments: Boss and the Urban Challenge , 2008, J. Field Robotics.

[17]  Shinpei Kato,et al.  An Open Approach to Autonomous Vehicles , 2015, IEEE Micro.

[18]  Ufuk Topcu,et al.  Receding horizon control for temporal logic specifications , 2010, HSCC '10.

[19]  Matthew McNaughton,et al.  Parallel Algorithms for Real-time Motion Planning , 2011 .