Skip to main content
Log in

SDLV: Verification of Steering Angle Safety for Self-Driving Cars

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Formal Aspects of Computing

Abstract

Self-driving cars over the last decade have achieved significant progress like driving millions of miles without any human intervention. However, behavioral safety in applying deep-neural-network-based (DNN based) systems for self-driving cars could not be guaranteed. Several real-world accidents involving self-driving cars have already happened, some of which have led to fatal collisions. In this paper, we present a novel and automated technique for verifying steering angle safety for self-driving cars. The technique is based on deep learning verification (DLV), which is an automated verification framework for safety of image classification neural networks. We extend DLV by leveraging neuron coverage and slack relationship to solve the judgement problem of predicted behaviors, and thus, to achieve verification of steering angle safety for self-driving cars. We evaluate our technique on the NVIDIA’s end-to-end self-driving architecture, which is a crucial ingredient in many modern self-driving cars. Experimental results show that our technique can successfully find adversarial misclassifications (i.e., incorrect steering decisions) within given regions if they exist. Therefore, we can achieve safety verification (if no misclassification is found for all DNN layers, in which case the network can be said to be stable or reliable w.r.t. steering decisions) or falsification (in which case the adversarial examples can be used to fine-tune the network).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Althoff, M., Dolan John, M.: Online verification of automated road vehicles using reachability analysis. IEEE Trans Robot 30(4), 903–918 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bastani O, Ioannou Y, Lampropoulos L, Vytiniotis D, Nori AV, Criminisi A (2016) Measuring neural net robustness with constraints. In: Advances in neural information processing systems 29: annual conference on neural information processing systems 2016, December 5–10, 2016, Barcelona, Spain, pp 2613–2621

  3. Bengio Y, Lamblin P, Popovici D, Larochelle H (2006) Greedy layer-wise training of deep networks. In: Advances in neural information processing systems 19, proceedings of the twentieth annual conference on neural information processing systems, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, December 4–7, 2006, pp 153–160

  4. Bojarski M, Del Testa D, Dworakowski D, Firner B, Flepp B, Goyal P, Jackel LD, Monfort M, Muller U, Zhang J, Zhang X, Zhao J, Zieba K (2016) End to end learning for self-driving cars. CoRR, arXiv:1604.07316

  5. Chauffeur model (2016)

  6. The numbers dont lie: self-driving cars are getting good (2017)

  7. Hinton GE, Rumelhart DE, Williams RJ (1998) Learning representations by back-propagating errors. In: Cognitive modeling, 1998

  8. Epoch model (2016)

  9. Fawzi A, Fawzi O, Frossard P (2015) Analysis of classifiers' robustness to adversarial perturbations. CoRR, arXiv:1502.02590

  10. Feth P, Schneider D, Adler R (2017) A conceptual safety supervisor definition and evaluation framework for autonomous systems. In: Computer safety, reliability, and security—36th international conference, SAFECOMP 2017, Trento, Italy, September 13–15, 2017, proceedings, pp 135–148

  11. Goodfellow, I.J., Bengio, Y., Courville, A.C.: Deep learning. MIT Press, Berlin, Adaptive computation and machine learning (2016)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Google's self-driving car caused its first crash (2016)

  13. Hauke J, Kossowski T (2011) Comparison of values of Pearsons and Spearmans correlation coefficients on the same sets of data. In: Quaestiones geographicae, p 87

  14. Huang X, Kwiatkowska M, Wang S, Wu M (2017) Safety verification of deep neural networks. In: Computer aided verification—29th international conference, CAV 2017, Heidelberg, Germany, July 24–28, 2017, proceedings, part I, pp 3–29

  15. Huang X

  16. Katz G, Barrett CW, Dill DL, Julian K, Kochenderfer MJ (2017) Reluplex: an efficient SMT solver for verifying deep neural networks. In: Computer aided verification—29th international conference, CAV 2017, Heidelberg, Germany, July 24–28, 2017, proceedings, part I, pp 97–117

  17. Katz G, Barrett CW, Dill DL, Julian K, Kochenderfer MJ (2017) Reluplex: an efficient SMT solver for verifying deep neural networks. CoRR, arXiv:1702.01135

  18. Kane A, Chowdhury O, Datta A, Koopman P (2015) A case study on runtime monitoring of an autonomous research vehicle (ARV) system. In: Runtime verification–6th international conference, RV 2015 Vienna, Austria, September 22–25, 2015. Proceedings, pp 102–117

  19. Keras (2019). https://keras.io

  20. Kalra N, Paddock SM (2016) Driving to safety: how many miles of driving would it take to demonstrate autonomous vehicle reliability?. In: Transportation research part A: policy and practice, vol 94, p 182C193

  21. Nair V, Hinton GE (2010) Rectified linear units improve restricted Boltzmann machines. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on machine learning (ICML-10), June 21–24, 2010, Haifa, Israel, pp 807–814

  22. Naumann M, Königshof H, Stiller C (2019) Provably safe and smooth lane changes in mixed trafic. In: 2019 IEEE intelligent transportation systems conference, ITSC 2019, Auckland, New Zealand, October 27–30, 2019, pp 1832–1837

  23. Pei K, Cao Y, Yang J, Jana S (2017) Deepxplore: automated whitebox testing of deep learning systems. In: Proceedings of the 26th symposium on operating systems principles, Shanghai, China, October 28–31, 2017, pp 1–18

  24. Pek C, Koschi M, Althoff M (2019) An online verification framework for motion planning of self-driving vehicles with safety guarantees. In: AAET

  25. Papernot N, McDaniel PD, Goodfellow IJ, Jha S, Celik ZB, Swami A (2016) Practical black-box attacks against deep learning systems using adversarial examples. CoRR, arXiv:1602.02697

  26. Pulina, L., Tacchella, A.: Challenging SMT solvers to verify neural networks. AI Commun 25(2), 117–135 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. Pek C, Zahn P, Althoff M (2017) Verifying the safety of lane change maneuvers of self-driving vehicles based on formalized traffic rules. In: IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium, IV 2017, Los Angeles, CA, USA, June 11–14, 2017, pp 1477–1483

  28. Rambo model (2016)

  29. Rambo model (2017). https://github.com/udacity/self-driving-car/tree/master/steering-models/community-models/rambo

  30. Roohi N, Kaur R, Weimer J, Sokolsky O, Lee I (2018) Self-driving vehicle verification towards a benchmark. CoRR, arXiv:1806.08810

  31. Stahl T, Eicher M, Betz J, Diermeyer F (2020) Online verification concept for autonomous vehicles—illustrative study for a trajectory planning module. CoRR, arXiv:2005.07740

  32. Schürmann B, Hess D, Eilbrecht J, Stursberg O, Köster F, Althoff M (2017) Ensuring drivability of planned motions using formal methods. In: 20th IEEE international conference on intelligent transportation systems, ITSC 2017, Yokohama, Japan, October 16–19, 2017, pp 1–8

  33. Rishi K, Samer H, Chris R (2015) Using convolutional neural networks for image recognition. Technical report, 2015

  34. Spearman C (1904) The proof and measurement of association between two things. Am J Psychol 72C101

  35. Shalev-Shwartz S, Shammah S, Shashua A (2017) On a formal model of safe and scalable self-driving cars. CoRR, arXiv:1708.06374

  36. SullyChen. Driving dataset

  37. Safety and trustworthiness of deep neural networks: a survey. CoRR, arXiv:1812.08342, 2018. Withdrawn

  38. Szegedy C, Zaremba W, Sutskever I, Bruna J, Erhan D, Goodfellow IJ, Fergus R (2014) Intriguing properties of neural networks. In: 2nd international conference on learning representations, ICLR 2014, Banff, AB, Canada, April 14–16, 2014, conference track proceedings

  39. Tesla says vehicle in deadly crash was on autopilot (2018)

  40. Tian Y, Pei K, Jana S, Ray B (2018) Deeptest: automated testing of deep-neural-network-driven autonomous cars. In: Proceedings of the 40th international conference on software engineering, ICSE 2018, Gothenburg, Sweden, May 27–June 03, 2018, pp 303–314

  41. Cheung SC, Chen TY, Yiu SM (1998) Metamorphic testing: a new approach for generating next test cases. Technical report, technical report HKUST-CS98-01, Department of Computer Science, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong

  42. Fatal car crash involving a self-driving uber shows there are major flaws in the software, hardware, and testing procedures involving autonomous vehicles (2018)

  43. Z3 (2019). http://rise4fun.com/z3

  44. Zhang M, Zhang Y, Zhang L, Liu C, Khurshid S (2018) Deeproad: Gan-based metamorphic testing and input validation framework for autonomous driving systems. In: Proceedings of the 33rd ACM/IEEE international conference on automated software engineering, ASE 2018, Montpellier, France, September 3–7, 2018, pp 132–142

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Weiqiang Kong.

Additional information

Zhiming Liu, Xiaoping Chen, Ji Wang and Jim Woodcock

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, H., Lv, D., Cui, T. et al. SDLV: Verification of Steering Angle Safety for Self-Driving Cars. Form Asp Comp 33, 325–341 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-021-00539-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-021-00539-2

Keywords

Navigation