Computationally Efficient Safety Falsification of Adaptive Cruise Control Systems

Falsification aims to disprove the safety of systems by providing counter-examples that lead to a violation of safety properties. In this work, we present two novel falsification methods to reveal safety flaws in adaptive cruise control (ACC) systems of automated vehicles. Our methods use rapidly-exploring random trees to generate motions for a leading vehicle such that the ACC under test causes a rear-end collision. By considering unsafe states and searching backward in time, we are able to drastically improve computation times and falsify even sophisticated ACC systems. The obtained collision scenarios reveal safety flaws of the ACC under test and can be directly used to improve the system’s design. We demonstrate the benefits of our methods by successfully falsifying the safety of state-of-the-art ACC systems and comparing the results to that of existing approaches.

[1]  Steven M. LaValle,et al.  Randomized Kinodynamic Planning , 1999, Proceedings 1999 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.99CH36288C).

[2]  Jonas Fredriksson,et al.  Safety Verification of Automated Driving Systems , 2013, IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine.

[3]  Feng Gao,et al.  A comprehensive review of the development of adaptive cruise control systems , 2010 .

[4]  Emilio Frazzoli,et al.  Incremental Search Methods for Reachability Analysis of Continuous and Hybrid Systems , 2004, HSCC.

[5]  James Kapinski,et al.  Efficient Guiding Strategies for Testing of Temporal Properties of Hybrid Systems , 2015, NFM.

[6]  Emilio Frazzoli,et al.  Sampling-based algorithms for optimal motion planning , 2011, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[7]  M. Fliess,et al.  On Differentially Flat Nonlinear Systems , 1992 .

[8]  Ioannis Kanellakopoulos,et al.  Nonlinear spacing policies for automated heavy-duty vehicles , 1998 .

[9]  T. Kanade,et al.  Monte Carlo road safety reasoning , 2005, IEEE Proceedings. Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, 2005..

[10]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  Automatic Generation of Safety-Critical Test Scenarios for Collision Avoidance of Road Vehicles , 2018, 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[11]  Gidon Ernst,et al.  ARCH-COMP18 Category Report: Results on the Falsification Benchmarks , 2018, ARCH@ADHS.

[12]  Payman Shakouri,et al.  Adaptive Cruise Control System: Comparing Gain-Scheduling PI and LQ Controllers , 2011 .

[13]  Paulo Tabuada,et al.  Control barrier function based quadratic programs with application to adaptive cruise control , 2014, 53rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[14]  Jan Lunze.  Adaptive Cruise Control With Guaranteed Collision Avoidance , 2019, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[15]  Georgios Fainekos,et al.  Simulation-based Adversarial Test Generation for Autonomous Vehicles with Machine Learning Components , 2018, 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[16]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Using driving simulators to assess driving safety. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[17]  Petros A. Ioannou,et al.  Autonomous intelligent cruise control , 1993 .

[18]  Satyandra K. Gupta,et al.  Automated generation of diverse and challenging scenarios for test and evaluation of autonomous vehicles , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[19]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  Adaptive cruise control design for active congestion avoidance , 2008 .

[20]  A Touran,et al.  A collision model for safety evaluation of autonomous intelligent cruise control. , 1999, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[21]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  Generating Critical Test Scenarios for Automated Vehicles with Evolutionary Algorithms , 2019, 2019 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[22]  Sriram Sankaranarayanan,et al.  Probabilistic Temporal Logic Falsification of Cyber-Physical Systems , 2013, TECS.

[23]  Jianqiang Wang,et al.  Longitudinal Safety Analysis For Heterogeneous Platoon of Automated And Human Vehicles , 2018, 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC).

[24]  Manfred Broy,et al.  Model-Based Testing of Reactive Systems, Advanced Lectures , 2005 .

[25]  Russ Tedrake,et al.  Scalable End-to-End Autonomous Vehicle Testing via Rare-event Simulation , 2018, NeurIPS.

[26]  Hang Yin,et al.  Accident Scenario Generation with Recurrent Neural Networks , 2018, 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC).

[27]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  Can automated road vehicles harmonize with traffic flow while guaranteeing a safe distance? , 2016, 2016 IEEE 19th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC).

[28]  Woosuk Choi,et al.  Assessing the safety benefits due to coordination amongst vehicles during an emergency braking maneuver , 2001, Proceedings of the 2001 American Control Conference. (Cat. No.01CH37148).

[29]  Lars Petersson,et al.  Statistical Threat Assessment for General Road Scenes Using Monte Carlo Sampling , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[30]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  A Formally Verified Checker of the Safe Distance Traffic Rules for Autonomous Vehicles , 2016, NFM.

[31]  Sanjit A. Seshia,et al.  Compositional Falsification of Cyber-Physical Systems with Machine Learning Components , 2017, NFM.

[32]  Azim Eskandarian,et al.  Research advances in intelligent collision avoidance and adaptive cruise control , 2003, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst..

[33]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  Adaptive Cruise Control with Safety Guarantees for Autonomous Vehicles , 2017 .

[34]  Calin Belta,et al.  Provably Safe Cruise Control of Vehicular Platoons , 2017, IEEE Control Systems Letters.

[35]  Petros A. Ioannou,et al.  Intelligent cruise control: theory and experiment , 1993, Proceedings of 32nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[36]  Matthias Althoff,et al.  CommonRoad: Composable benchmarks for motion planning on roads , 2017, 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).