面向自动驾驶测试的交互场景策略建模与仿真

doi:10.19562/j.chinasae.qcgc.2024.11.003

Abstract

Abstract:

The interaction ability between Highly Automated Vehicles （HAV） with human-driven vehicles is critical to the operational safety and efficiency of hybrid traffic in future. In order to test the interactivity of HAV， the background vehicle in the testing scenario needs to have naturalistic interaction characteristics and reflect the heterogeneous interaction strategy of human drivers. Based on the game theory， the Game-theoretical Strategic Interaction Model （GSIM） is developed in this paper. In the individual utility function， the interactive social characterization parameters with distinguishable values are introduced to directionally regulate the interaction strategy of the background vehicle. The test results of unprotected left-turning scenarios at intersections show that GSIM preserves the interpretability of natural driving stepwise planning and mutual interactions to ensure simulation accuracy of interactive behaviors. GSIM is also able to effectively reflect the interactive strategy of human driving in high-risk scenarios， helping to provide challenging and valuable testing scenarios. Compared to traditional Intelligent Driver Models， GSIM improves average simulation accuracy by 42.8% in unprotected left turn scenarios and serious conflicts recurrence rate by 25.8%.

Key words: highly automated vehicles, scenario testing, interaction strategy, game theory, driving behavior

Jian Sun,He Zhang,Xiaocong Zhao,Yiru Liu,Ye Tian. Interactive Scenarios Strategy Modeling and Simulation for Automated Driving Testing[J].Automotive Engineering, 2024, 46(11): 1962-1972.

Figures/Tables 17

References 35

1	MARKKULA G， MADIGAN R， NATHANAEL D， et al. Defining interactions： a conceptual framework for understanding interactive behaviour in human and automated road traffic ［J］. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science， 2020， 21（6）： 728-752.
2	MCCARTHY R L. Autonomous vehicle accident data analysis： California OL 316 reports： 2015-2020 ［J］. ASCE-ASME Journal of Risk and Uncertainty in Engineering Systems， Part B： Mechanical Engineering， 2022， 8（3）： 034502.
3	UNECE. Future certification of automated/autonomous driving systems ［EB/OL］. ［2019-01-28］. https：//unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2019/wp29grva/GRVA-02-09e.pdf.
4	余荣杰，田野，孙剑. 高等级自动驾驶汽车虚拟测试：研究进展与前沿［J］. 中国公路学报， 2020， 33（11）： 125-138.
	YU R J， TIAN Y， SUN J. Highly automated vehicle virtual testing：a review of recent developments and research frontiers ［J］. China Journal of Highway and Transport， 2020， 33（11）： 125-138.
5	DING W H， CHEN B M， LI B， et al. Multimodal safety-critical scenarios generation for decision-making algorithms evaluation ［J］. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters， 2021， 6（2）： 1551-1558.
6	KRAJEWSKI R， MOERS T， MEISTER A， et al. BézierVAE： improved trajectory modeling using variational autoencoders for the safety validation of highly automated vehicles ［C］. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference （ITSC）， 2019.
7	WANG J K， PUN A， TU J， et al. Advsim： generating safety-critical scenarios for self-driving vehicles ［C］. IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition， 2021.
8	BHATTACHARYYA R， WULFE B， PHILLIPS D J， et al. Modeling human driving behavior through generative adversarial imitation learning ［J］. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems， 2023， 24（3）： 2874-2887.
9	TRAUTMAN P， MA J， MURRAY R M， et al. Robot navigation in dense human crowds： statistical models and experimental studies of human-robot cooperation ［J］. The International Journal of Robotics Research， 2015， 34（3）： 335-356.
10	FENG S， YAN X， SUN H， et al. Intelligent driving intelligence test for autonomous vehicles with naturalistic and adversarial environment ［J］. Nature Communications， 2021， 12（1）： 1-14.
11	WACHI A. Failure-scenario maker for rule-based agent using multi-agent adversarial reinforcement learning and its application to autonomous driving ［J］. arXiv preprint arXiv：， 2019.
12	FENG S， SUN H W， YAN X T， et al. Dense reinforcement learning for safety validation of autonomous vehicles ［J］. Nature， 2023， 615（7953）： 620-627.
13	SAIFUZZAMAN M，ZHENG Z D. Incorporating human-factors in car-following models： a review of recent developments and research needs ［J］. Transportation Research Part C： Emerging Technologies， 2014， 48： 379-403.
14	ZHENG Z D. Recent developments and research needs in modeling lane changing ［J］. Transportation Research Part B： Methodological， 2014， 60： 16-32.
15	李逸昕，倪颖，孙剑. 混合交通流交叉口共享空间交互行为建模及仿真［J］. 交通运输系统工程与信息， 2022， 22（3）： 255-266.
	LI Y X， NI Y， SUN J. Modeling and simulation of interaction between road users at mixed-traffic intersections ［J］. Journal of Transportation systems Engineering and Information Technology， 2022， 22（3）： 255-266.
16	SCHWARTING W， PIERSON A， ALONSO-MORA J， et al. Social behavior for autonomous vehicles ［J］. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences， 2019， 116（50）： 24972-24978.
17	SHIRADO H， KASAHARA S，CHRISTAKIS N. Emergence and collapse of reciprocity in semiautomatic driving coordination experiments with humans ［J］. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America， 2023， 120： e2307804120.
18	MYERSON R B. Game theory［M］. Harvard University Press， 2013.
19	LI N， OYLER D W， ZHANG M X， et al. Game theoretic modeling of driver and vehicle interactions for verification and validation of autonomous vehicle control systems ［J］. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology， 2017， 26（5）： 1782-1797.
20	LINIGER A，LYGEROS J. A noncooperative game approach to autonomous racing ［J］. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology， 2019， 28（3）： 884-897.
21	SPICA R， CRISTOFALO E， WANG Zijian， et al. A real-time game theoretic planner for autonomous two-player drone racing ［J］. IEEE Transactions on Robotics， 2020， 36（5）： 1389-1403.
22	WANG M， HOOGENDOORN S P， DAAMEN W， et al. Game theoretic approach for predictive lane-changing and car-following control ［J］. Transportation Research Part C： Emerging Technologies， 2015， 58： 73-92.
23	RAHMATI Y， HOSSEINI M K，TALEBPOUR A. Helping automated vehicles with left-turn maneuvers： a game theory-based decision framework for conflicting maneuvers at intersections ［J］. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems， 2022， 23（8）： 11877-11890.
24	REN Y， ELLIOTT S， WANG Y W， et al. How shall I drive？ interaction modeling and motion planning towards empathetic and socially-graceful driving ［C］. International Conference on Robotics and Automation （ICRA）， 2019.
25	YU H T， TSENG H E，LANGARI R. A human-like game theory-based controller for automatic lane changing ［J］. Transportation Research Part C： Emerging Technologies， 2018， 88： 140-158.
26	TIAN R， LI S S， LI N， et al. Adaptive game-theoretic decision making for autonomous vehicle control at roundabouts ［C］. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control （CDC）， 2018.
27	LI D F，PAN H. Two-lane two-way overtaking decision model with driving style awareness based on a game-theoretic framework ［J］. Transportmetrica A： Transport Science， 2023， 19（3）： 2076755.
28	CHAHINE M， FIROOZI R， XIAO W， et al. Intention communication and hypothesis likelihood in game-theoretic motion planning ［J］. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters， 2023， 8（3）： 1223-1230.
29	MURPHY R O，ACKERMANN K A. Social value orientation： theoretical and measurement issues in the study of social preferences ［J］. Personality and Social Psychology Review， 2014， 18（1）： 13-41.
30	赵晓聪，房世玉，李子睿，等. 社会性驾驶交互关键效用析取与应用［J］. 汽车工程， 2024， 46（2）： 230-240.
	ZHAO X C， FANG S Y， LI Z R， et al. Extraction and application of key utility term for social driving interaction ［J］. Automotive Engineering， 2024， 46（2）： 230-240.
31	ZHANG H， SUN J，TIAN Y. Accelerated risk assessment for highly automated vehicles： surrogate-based Monte Carlo method ［J］. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems， 2023， 25（6）： 5488-5497.
32	KOSCHI M， PEK C， MAIERHOFER S， et al. Computationally efficient safety falsification of adaptive cruise control systems ［C］. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference （ITSC）， 2019.
33	FELLENDORF M，VORTISCH P. Microscopic traffic flow simulator VISSIM ［J］. Fundamentals of Traffic Simulation， 2010： 63-93.
34	ZHANG D， CHEN X Y， WANG J H， et al. A comprehensive comparison study of four classical car-following models based on the large-scale naturalistic driving experiment ［J］. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory， 2021， 113： 102383.
35	FAN H Y， ZHU F， LIU C C， et al. Baidu apollo EM motion planner ［J］. arXiv preprint arXiv：， 2018.

[1]	ZHOU Wei, ZHANG Cheng-Ning, LI Jun-Qiu. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1407 -1414 .
[2]	HAO Han, WANG Si-南, LI Xiao, LIU Zong-Wei, ZHAO Fu-Quan. [J]. , 2017, 39(1): 1 -8 .
[3]	XU Cheng-Shan, JIANG Fa-Chao, SONG Sen-Nan, TIAN Guang-Yu. [J]. , 2017, 39(1): 9 -14 .
[4]	JIANG Ting, DAI Bing. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1459 -1466 .
[5]	ZHANG Yi-Bing, 吕Jian-Jun , YUAN Guang-Hui. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1467 -1470 .
[6]	LIU Hui, WANG Xiao-Jie, XIANG Chang-Le. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1483 -1487 .
[7]	CHEN Wu-Wei, DENG Shu-Chao, HUANG He, XIE You-Hao. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1488 -1493 .
[8]	PENG Qian-Lei, GUI Liang-Jin, FAN Zi-Jie. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1500 -1507 .
[9]	LI Ling, MA Li, MOU Yu, XU Chao, LI Wen-Ru, SHI Shu-Ming. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1508 -1514 .
[10]	GAO Ji-Dong, GAO Bo-Lin, XIE Shu-Gang. [J]. , 2016, 38(12): 1515 -1520 .

仿真模型	语义交互结果一致率/%	速度RMSE/ （m·s^-1）	最小 APET 误差/s	平均 APET 误差/s	轨迹平均误差（欧氏距离）/ m
仿真模型	语义交互结果一致率/%	速度RMSE/ （m·s^-1）	最小 APET 误差/s	平均 APET 误差/s	左转	直行
IDM	78.0	2.26	+0.83	+0.66	2.60	3.89
SE-IBR	80.9	2.11	+1.45	+0.48	3.38	4.09
GSIM	82.8	1.81	+0.72	+0.56	1.82	1.73

测试类型	算法失效率/%		最小APET/s			平均APET/s	严重冲突事件数	最大加速度/ （m·s^-2）	最大加加速度/ （m·s^-3）
测试类型	左转	直行	左转	直行	左转	直行	严重冲突事件数	最大加速度/ （m·s^-2）	最大加加速度/ （m·s^-3）
回放测试	7.4	4.4	1.2	3.9	2.1	4.9	20	0.78	2.33
IDM测试	9.6	7.4	1.4	2.6	2.5	4.0	31	0.83	3.15
SE-IBR测试	6.4	1.1	1.9	2.0	2.7	2.7	22	1.42	4.19
GSIM测试	37.2	2.1	1.4	3.6	2.0	4.6	39	0.86	4.38

Interactive Scenarios Strategy Modeling and Simulation for Automated Driving Testing

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 17

References 35

Related Articles 7

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 10

[1]	Yongtao Liu,Feiran Sun,Shiquan Yuan,Longxin Gao,Ying Cao,Yisong Chen,Jie Qiao. Research on the Intelligent Connected Vehicle Lane Changing Strategies in Mixed Traffic Environment of Expressway [J]. Automotive Engineering, 2024, 46(5): 754-765.
[2]	Xinghua Wang,Lin Hu,Yong Peng,Xianhui Wu,Guoliang Xiang,Qian Xu. Research on Drivers' Hazard Perception Before Vehicle-to-Powered Two-Wheeler Crashes [J]. Automotive Engineering, 2024, 46(3): 498-508.
[3]	Xiaocong Zhao,Shiyu Fang,Zirui Li,Jian Sun. Extraction and Application of Key Utility Term for Social Driving Interaction [J]. Automotive Engineering, 2024, 46(2): 230-240.
[4]	Zhongjie Liu,Zhiguo Zhao,Qin Yu. Vehicle Assisted Driving Behavior Decision-Making Based on Dynamic Risk Assessment [J]. Automotive Engineering, 2024, 46(11): 2005-2016.
[5]	Tian Yuan,Xuan Zhao,Rui Liu,Qiang Yu,Xichan Zhu,Shu Wang. An Analysis on Longitudinal Driving Characteristics in Urban Intersection Based on Natural Driving Data [J]. Automotive Engineering, 2022, 44(6): 821-830.
[6]	Wei Yuan,Guosong Yang,Rui Fu,Zhi Zhang,Kangkang Zhang. Research on the Influence of Driver’s Inhibitory Control on Risky Driving Behavior [J]. Automotive Engineering, 2021, 43(4): 601-609.
[7]	Li Zhongxing, Shen Ancheng, Jiang Hong. Research on Multi-Agent Game Control System of an Electronic Air Suspension [J]. Automotive Engineering, 2020, 42(6): 793-800.