Synthesis of Different Autonomous Vehicles Test Approaches

Currently, the most prevalent way to evaluate an autonomous vehicle is to directly test it on the public road. However, because of recent accidents caused by autonomous vehicles, it becomes controversial about whether on-road tests should be the best approach. Alternatively, people use test tracks or simulation to assess the safety of autonomous vehicles. These approaches are time-efficient and less costly, however, their credibility varies. In this paper, we propose to use a co-Kriging model to synthesize the results from different evaluation approaches, which allows us to fully utilize the information and provides an accurate, affordable, and safe way to assess a design of an autonomous vehicle.

[1]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Gaussian processes for machine learning , 2005, Adaptive computation and machine learning.

[2]  Sonja Kuhnt,et al.  Design and analysis of computer experiments , 2010 .

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

[4]  Ding Zhao,et al.  Accelerated Evaluation of Automated Vehicles Using Piecewise Mixture Models , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[5]  Yaohui Guo,et al.  A Versatile Approach to Evaluating and Testing Automated Vehicles based on Kernel Methods , 2017, 2018 Annual American Control Conference (ACC).

[6]  Thomas J. Santner,et al.  The Design and Analysis of Computer Experiments , 2003, Springer Series in Statistics.

[7]  Alexander I. J. Forrester,et al.  Multi-fidelity optimization via surrogate modelling , 2007, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[8]  Julien Bect,et al.  Sequential design of experiment on a stochastic multi-fidelity simulator to estimate a probability of exceeding a threshold , 2017 .

[9]  Barry L. Nelson,et al.  Stochastic kriging for simulation metamodeling , 2008, 2008 Winter Simulation Conference.

[10]  Ding Zhao,et al.  Sequential experimentation to efficiently test automated vehicles , 2017, 2017 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC).

[11]  Ding Zhao,et al.  Analysis of unprotected intersection left-turn conflicts based on naturalistic driving data , 2017, 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[12]  Jeremy Staum,et al.  Better simulation metamodeling: The why, what, and how of stochastic kriging , 2009, Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference (WSC).

[13]  Jack P. C. Kleijnen,et al.  Kriging Metamodeling in Simulation: A Review , 2007, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[14]  R. Haftka,et al.  Review of multi-fidelity models , 2016, Advances in Computational Science and Engineering.

[15]  e-traces,et al.  Self-Driving Uber Car Kills Pedestrian in Arizona, Where Robots Roam - e-traces , 2018 .

[16]  Ding Zhao,et al.  Evaluation of automated vehicles encountering pedestrians at unsignalized crossings , 2017, 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[17]  Ding Zhao,et al.  Towards affordable on-track testing for autonomous vehicle — A Kriging-based statistical approach , 2017, 2017 IEEE 20th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC).