Discovering Avoidable Planner Failures of Autonomous Vehicles using Counterfactual Analysis in Behaviorally Diverse Simulation

Automated Vehicles require exhaustive testing in simulation to detect as many safety-critical failures as possible before deployment on public roads. In this work, we focus on the core decision-making component of autonomous robots: their planning algorithm. We introduce a planner testing framework that leverages recent progress in simulating behaviorally diverse traffic participants. Using large scale search, we generate, detect, and characterize dynamic scenarios leading to collisions. In particular, we propose methods to distinguish between unavoidable and avoidable accidents, focusing especially on automatically finding planner-specific defects that must be corrected before deployment. Through experiments in complex multi-agent intersection scenarios, we show that our method can indeed find a wide range of critical planner failures.

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

[2]  Takuya Akiba,et al.  Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Framework , 2019, KDD.

[3]  Mykel J. Kochenderfer,et al.  Adaptive Stress Testing for Autonomous Vehicles , 2018, 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[4]  Daniel V. McGehee,et al.  Driver Reaction Time in Crash Avoidance Research: Validation of a Driving Simulator Study on a Test Track , 2000 .

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

[6]  Daniel Krajzewicz,et al.  Recent Development and Applications of SUMO - Simulation of Urban MObility , 2012 .

[7]  Shin-ichi Maeda,et al.  Reconnaissance and Planning algorithm for constrained MDP , 2019, ArXiv.

[8]  Ken Goldberg,et al.  FLUIDS: A First-Order Local Urban Intersection Driving Simulator , 2018 .

[9]  Katherine Rose Driggs-Campbell,et al.  Adaptive Stress Testing with Reward Augmentation for Autonomous Vehicle Validatio , 2019, 2019 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC).

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

[11]  Ding Zhao,et al.  Evaluation of automated vehicles in the frontal cut-in scenario — An enhanced approach using piecewise mixture models , 2016, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[12]  Jonathan DeCastro,et al.  Behaviorally Diverse Traffic Simulation via Reinforcement Learning , 2020, 2020 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).

[13]  Amnon Shashua,et al.  On a Formal Model of Safe and Scalable Self-driving Cars , 2017, ArXiv.

[14]  Brigitte d'Andréa-Novel,et al.  The kinematic bicycle model: A consistent model for planning feasible trajectories for autonomous vehicles? , 2017, 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[15]  George F. List,et al.  New Algorithms for Computing the Time-to-Collision in Freeway Traffic Simulation Models , 2014, Comput. Intell. Neurosci..

[16]  Ding Zhao,et al.  Accelerated Evaluation of Automated Vehicles. , 2016 .

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

[18]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Visualizing Data using t-SNE , 2008 .

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

[20]  Helbing,et al.  Congested traffic states in empirical observations and microscopic simulations , 2000, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.