Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3650212.3680325acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesisstaConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

VioHawk: Detecting Traffic Violations of Autonomous Driving Systems through Criticality-Guided Simulation Testing

Published: 11 September 2024 Publication History

Abstract

As highlighted in authoritative standards (e.g., ISO21448), traffic law compliance is a fundamental prerequisite for the commercialization of autonomous driving systems (ADS). Hence, manufacturers are in severe need of techniques to detect harsh driving situations in which the target ADS would violate traffic laws. To achieve this goal, existing works commonly resort to searching-based simulation testing, which continuously adjusts the scenario configurations (e.g., add new vehicles) of initial simulation scenarios and hunts for critical scenarios. Specifically, they apply pre-defined heuristics on each mutated scenario to approximate the likelihood of triggering ADS traffic violations, and accordingly perform searching scheduling. However, with those comparably more critical scenarios in hand, they fail to offer deterministic guidance on which and how scenario configurations should be further mutated to reliably trigger the target ADS misbehaviors. Hence, they inevitably suffer from meaningless efforts to traverse the huge scenario search space. In this work, we propose VioHawk, a novel simulation-based fuzzer that hunts for scenarios that imply ADS traffic violations. Our key idea is that, traffic law regulations can be formally modeled as hazardous/non-hazardous driving areas on the map at each timestamp during ADS simulation testing (e.g., when the traffic light is red, the intersection is marked as hazardous areas). Following this idea, VioHawk works by inducing the autonomous vehicle to drive into the law-specified hazardous areas with deterministic mutation operations. We evaluated the effectiveness of VioHawk in testing industry-grade ADS (i.e., Apollo). We constructed a benchmark dataset that contains 42 ADS violation scenarios against real-world traffic laws. Compared to existing tools, VioHawk can reproduce 3.1X~13.3X more violations within the same time budget, and save 1.6X~8.9X the reproduction time for those identified violations. Finally, with the help of VioHawk, we identified 9+8 previously unknown violations of real-world traffic laws on Apollo 7.0/8.0.

References

[1]
[n. d.]. LGSVL Python API. https://www.svlsimulator.com/docs/##python-api
[2]
2023. American Fuzzy Lop. http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/afl
[3]
2023. Apollo: An Open Autonomous Driving Platform. https://github.com/ ApolloAuto/apollo
[4]
2023. Autonomous Vehicle Collision Reports. https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/vehicle-industry-services/autonomous-vehicles/autonomous-vehicle-collision-reports/
[5]
2023. Autoware-AI. https://github.com/autowarefoundation/autoware
[6]
2023. BeamNG.tech. https://beamng.tech/services/##adas-autonomous-driving/
[7]
2023. Companies That Develop Autonomous Driving. https://aimagazine.com/technology/top-10-companies-developing-autonomous-vehicle-technology
[8]
2023. ISO 21448. https://www.iso.org/standard/77490.html
[9]
2023. ISO 34502:Road vehicles–Test scenarios for Automated Driving Systems–Scenario Based Safety Evaluation Framework. https://www.iso.org/standard/78951.html
[10]
2023. LGSVL 2021.2.2. https://github.com/lgsvl/simulator/tree/release-2021.2
[11]
2023. New York State Driver’s Manual & practice tests. https://dmv.ny.gov/driver-license/drivers-manual-practice-tests
[12]
2023. OSMIUM:OpenStreetMap Parser. https://github.com/osmcode/pyosmium
[13]
2023. Patch for the Double-Yellow-Line Check. https://github.com/ApolloAuto/apollo/pull/13629
[14]
2023. Regulations for the Implementation of the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China. https://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2004/content_62772.htm
[15]
2023. Road Traffic Safety Law of the People’s Republic of China. https://www.gov.cn/banshi/2005-08/23/content_25575.htm
[16]
2023. SanFrancisco Map in LGSVL. https://github.com/lgsvl/SanFrancisco
[17]
2023. Shapely. https://github.com/shapely/shapely
[18]
2023. Wiki: Formal Methods. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_methods
[19]
2023. Wiki: OpenStreetMap. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap
[20]
Emmanuel Bengio, Moksh Jain, and et al. 2021. Flow Network based Generative Models for Non-iterative Diverse Candidate Generation. NeurIPS.
[21]
Yulong Cao, S Hrushikesh Bhupathiraju, and et al. 2023. You Can’t See Me: Physical Removal Attacks on LiDAR-based Autonomous Vehicles Driving Frameworks. In USENIX Security.
[22]
Yulong Cao, Ningfei Wang, and et al. 2021. Invisible for Both Camera and Lidar: Security of Multi-sensor Fusion Based Perception in Autonomous Driving under Physical-world Attacks. In SP.
[23]
Mingfei Cheng, Yuan Zhou, and et al. 2023. BehAVExplor: Behavior Diversity Guided Testing for Autonomous Driving Systems. In ISSTA.
[24]
Alexey Dosovitskiy, German Ros, Felipe Codevilla, Antonio Lopez, and Vladlen Koltun. 2017. CARLA: An Open Urban Driving Simulator. In Conference on Robot Learning.
[25]
Georgios E Fainekos. 2011. Revising Temporal Logic Specifications for Motion Planning. In ICRA.
[26]
Georgios E Fainekos, Hadas Kress-Gazit, and et al. 2005. Temporal Logic Motion Planning for Mobile Robots. In ICRA.
[27]
Alessio Gambi, Tri Huynh, and Gordon Fraser. 2019. Generating effective test cases for self-driving cars from police reports. In Proceedings of the 2019 27th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. 257–267.
[28]
Alessio Gambi, Marc Mueller, and Gordon Fraser. 2019. Automatically testing self-driving cars with search-based procedural content generation. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. 318–328.
[29]
David E. Goldberg. 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.
[30]
Jia Cheng Han and Zhi Quan Zhou. 2020. Metamorphic Fuzz Testing of Autonomous Vehicles. In ICSE Workshops.
[31]
Fitash Ul Haq, Donghwan Shin, and Lionel Briand. 2022. Efficient online testing for dnn-enabled systems using surrogate-assisted and many-objective optimization. In Proceedings of the 44th international conference on software engineering. 811–822.
[32]
Fitash Ul Haq, Donghwan Shin, and Lionel C Briand. 2023. Many-objective reinforcement learning for online testing of dnn-enabled systems. In 2023 IEEE/ACM 45th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE). 1814–1826.
[33]
Zhisheng Hu, Shengjian Guo, and et al. 2021. Coverage-based Scene Fuzzing for Virtual Autonomous Driving Testing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.00873.
[34]
Yuqi Huai, Yuntianyi Chen, and et al. 2023. Doppelgänger Test Generation for Revealing Bugs in Autonomous Driving Software. In ICSE.
[35]
Kim Hyungsub, Ozmen Muslum Ozgur, and et al. 2021. PGFUZZ: Policy-guided Fuzzing for Robotic Vehicles. In NDSS.
[36]
Edmond Irani Liu, Gerald Würsching, and et al. 2022. CommonRoad-Reach: A Toolbox for Reachability Analysis of Automated Vehicles. In ITSC.
[37]
Seulbae Kim, Major Liu, and et al. 2022. DriveFuzz: Discovering Autonomous Driving Bugs through Driving Quality-Guided Fuzzing. In CCS.
[38]
Hadas Kress-Gazit, Georgios E Fainekos, and et al. 2007. Where’s waldo? Sensor-based Temporal Logic Motion Planning. In ICRA.
[39]
Morteza Lahijanian, Joseph Wasniewski, and et al. 2010. Motion Planning and Control From Temporal Logic Specifications with Probabilistic Satisfaction guarantees. In ICRA.
[40]
Changwen Li, Chih-Hong Cheng, and et al. 2022. ComOpT: Combination and Optimization for Testing Autonomous Driving Systems. In ICRA.
[41]
Changwen Li, Joseph Sifakis, and et al. 2023. Simulation-Based Validation for Autonomous Driving Systems. ISSTA.
[42]
Guanpeng Li, Yiran Li, and et al. 2020. AV-FUZZER: Finding Safety Violations in Autonomous Driving Systems. In ISSRE.
[43]
Chengjie Lu, Yize Shi, and et al. 2022. Learning Configurations of Operating Environment of Autonomous Vehicles to Maximize Their Collisions. TSE.
[44]
Zi Peng, Jinqiu Yang, and et al. 2020. A First Look at the Integration of Machine Learning Models in Complex Autonomous Driving Systems: A Case Study on Apollo. In FSE.
[45]
Vincenzo Riccio and Paolo Tonella. 2020. Model-based exploration of the frontier of behaviours for deep learning system testing. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM Joint Meeting on European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering. 876–888.
[46]
Guodong Rong, Byung Hyun Shin, and et al. 2020. Lgsvl Simulator: A High Fidelity Simulator for Autonomous Driving. In ITSC.
[47]
Jinyang Shao. 2021. Testing Object Detection for Autonomous Driving Systems via 3D Reconstruction. In ICSE-Companion.
[48]
Ruoyu Song, Muslum Ozgur Ozmen, and et al. 2023. Discovering Adversarial Driving Maneuvers Against Autonomous Vehicles. In USENIX Security.
[49]
Sebastian Söntges and Matthias Althoff. 2017. Computing Possible Driving Corridors for Automated Vehicles. In IV.
[50]
Jiachen Sun, Yulong Cao, and et al. 2020. Towards Robust Lidar-based Perception in Autonomous Driving: General Black-box Adversarial Sensor Attack and Countermeasures. In USENIX Security.
[51]
Yang Sun, Christopher M Poskitt, and et al. 2022. LawBreaker: An Approach for Specifying Traffic Laws and Fuzzing Autonomous Vehicles. In ICSE.
[52]
Haoxiang Tian, Yan Jiang, and et al. 2022. MOSAT: Finding Safety Violations of Autonomous Driving Systems Using Multi-objective Genetic Algorithm. In ESEC/FSE.
[53]
Sen Wang, Zhuheng Sheng, and et al. 2022. ADEPT: A Testing Platform for Simulated Autonomous Driving. In ASE.
[54]
Chen Yan, Zhijian Xu, and et al. 2022. Rolling Colors: Adversarial Laser Exploits Against Traffic Light Recognition. In USENIX Security.
[55]
Qingzhao Zhang, David Ke Hong, and et al. 2021. A Systematic Framework to Identify Violations of Scenario-dependent Driving Rules in Autonomous Vehicle Software. ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems.
[56]
Xiaodong Zhang, Wei Zhao, Yang Sun, Jun Sun, Yulong Shen, Xuewen Dong, and Zijiang Yang. 2023. Testing automated driving systems by breaking many laws efficiently. In Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. 942–953.
[57]
Ziyuan Zhong, Gail Kaiser, and et al. 2022. Neural Network Guided Evolutionary Fuzzing for Finding Traffic Violations of Autonomous Vehicles. TSE.
[58]
Yuan Zhou, Yang Sun, and et al. 2023. Specification-based Autonomous Driving System Testing. TSE.
[59]
Tahereh Zohdinasab, Vincenzo Riccio, Alessio Gambi, and Paolo Tonella. 2021. Deephyperion: exploring the feature space of deep learning-based systems through illumination search. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis. 79–90.

Index Terms

  1. VioHawk: Detecting Traffic Violations of Autonomous Driving Systems through Criticality-Guided Simulation Testing

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ISSTA 2024: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Software Testing and Analysis
      September 2024
      1928 pages
      ISBN:9798400706127
      DOI:10.1145/3650212
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Sponsors

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 11 September 2024

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Badges

      Author Tags

      1. autonomous driving system
      2. simulation testing
      3. traffic violation

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Funding Sources

      • National Natural Science Foundation of China
      • National Key Research and Development Program of China
      • Shanghai Rising-Star Program
      • Shanghai Pilot Program for Basic Research-Fudan University

      Conference

      ISSTA '24
      Sponsor:

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate 58 of 213 submissions, 27%

      Upcoming Conference

      ISSTA '25

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • 0
        Total Citations
      • 147
        Total Downloads
      • Downloads (Last 12 months)147
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)24
      Reflects downloads up to 05 Jan 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media