Self-adaptive cruise expected function safety test evaluation method and device in curve scene

Abstract

The invention relates to the field of expected function safety test, in particular to an adaptive cruise expected function safety test evaluation method and device in a curve scene. The method comprises the following steps: acquiring an unsafe control behavior in a curve scene of an automatic driving vehicle, constructing a cause scene, and further obtaining an expected function safety demand; constructing a simulation test scene of the adaptive cruise of the vehicle in simulation software, performing testing, and determining a safety evaluation dimension index and a weight coefficient of the safety evaluation dimension index; designing a cost function, and obtaining a safety risk level scoring result according to the safety evaluation dimension index, the weight coefficient of the safety evaluation dimension index and the cost function; and obtaining an expected function safety test evaluation result of the adaptive cruise in the curve scene according to the safety risk level scoring result. According to the method, the risk score of the expected function safety of the adaptive cruise in the curve scene can be determined, so that the importance degree of test evaluation is determined, and unknown risks are verified and evaluated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the technical field of expected functional safety testing, and in particular to a method and device for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario. Background Art

[0002] As autonomous driving technology develops from L2 to L3 and higher levels, the complexity and integration of vehicle functions have increased significantly. This requires the system to not only operate stably under normal conditions, but also to be highly adaptable and robust in complex and changing traffic environments. Intended functional safety is proposed to meet the new challenges that may arise during this technological leap. SOTIF (Safety of The Intended Functionality) is mainly intended to solve vehicle-wide hazards caused by non-vehicle functional failures, thereby focusing on avoiding potential safety accidents caused by design defects or performance limitations.

[0003] However, in the current academic research on expected functional safety, most of the focus is on qualitative research, analyzing the scenarios where expected functional safety problems may occur or the functional deficiencies that lead to expected functional safety problems; there is a lack of quantitative analysis, that is, pointing out the quantitative evaluation criteria in the sense of specific statistical calculations. As an important part of ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance System), the adaptive cruise system function module has attracted the attention of most scholars because of its broad application prospects in actual production and life. The main function of ACC (Adaptive Cruise Control) can be defined as controlling the throttle opening and brake pressure of the vehicle on the basis of maintaining a certain following distance and relative speed, so as to achieve automatic following.

[0004] Since self-driving vehicles cannot guarantee the realization of adaptive cruise control under the influence of complex external traffic conditions and environment, the following situations may occur in the curve scene: ACC function failure, resulting in a collision with the controlled vehicle; the vehicle fails to change lanes on time, resulting in a collision; the vehicle fails to respond to the lane change command, resulting in a rear-end collision with the vehicle behind; the acceleration and deceleration of the vehicle exceeds the safety threshold (riding comfort threshold, vehicle safety threshold), affecting the passenger experience; the passenger accidentally touches the ACC, resulting in an unexpected collision with the vehicle in front. There are also some unforeseen emergencies that will cause risks to the expected functional safety of self-driving vehicles. Accurately and reliably verifying the degree of danger of the causal scenario, as well as verifying and evaluating unknown risks and ultimately confirming the expected functional safety of self-driving vehicles are issues that need to be addressed. Summary of the invention

[0005] In order to solve the technical problem of how to identify, analyze and quantify the expected functional safety issues that an adaptive cruise control system may face during cornering, an embodiment of the present invention provides a method and device for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of an adaptive cruise control system in a cornering scenario. The technical solution is as follows:

[0006] On the one hand, a method for safety testing and evaluation of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario is provided, the method being implemented by an expected function safety testing and evaluation device, and the method comprising:

[0007] S1. Obtain unsafe control behaviors of autonomous driving vehicles in curve scenarios.

[0008] S2. Based on the unsafe control behavior, construct the causal scenario and obtain the expected functional safety requirements.

[0009] S3. Based on the expected functional safety requirements, a simulation test scenario for vehicle adaptive cruise control is constructed in the simulation software and tested to obtain test results.

[0010] S4. Determine the safety evaluation dimension indicators and the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators based on the test results.

[0011] S5. Design a cost function, and obtain the safety risk level scoring result according to the safety evaluation dimension indicators, the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators and the cost function.

[0012] S6. Based on the safety risk level scoring results, the expected functional safety test evaluation results of adaptive cruise control in the curve scenario are obtained.

[0013] Optionally, obtaining unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in a curve scenario in S1 includes:

[0014] S11. Determine safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events by conducting a system theoretical process analysis of the adaptive cruise control ACC system.

[0015] S12. Design vehicle-level safety goals based on safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events.

[0016] S13. Based on the vehicle-level hazardous events and vehicle-level safety goals, the unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in the curve scenario are obtained.

[0017] Optionally, the vehicle-level hazard events in S11 include:

[0018] The ACC function fails and the controlled vehicle collides.

[0019] Failure to change lanes on time resulted in a vehicle collision.

[0020] The driver did not respond to the lane change command and the vehicle behind him rear-ended him.

[0021] The vehicle's acceleration and deceleration exceeds the safety threshold.

[0022] The passenger accidentally touched the ACC, causing an unexpected collision with the vehicle in front.

[0023] Optionally, in S2, a causal scenario is constructed based on the unsafe control behavior to obtain the expected functional safety requirements, including:

[0024] S21. Construct trigger conditions and performance limitations for each unsafe control behavior, and construct causal scenarios based on the unsafe control behavior, trigger conditions, and performance limitations.

[0025] S22. Based on the causal scenarios and vehicle-level safety goals, the expected functional safety requirements are obtained.

[0026] Optionally, based on the expected functional safety requirements, in S3, a simulation test scenario of vehicle adaptive cruise control is constructed in the simulation software and tested to obtain test results, including:

[0027] Based on the expected functional safety requirements, a vehicle dynamics model is created in the simulation software, a controller control decision algorithm is added, a vehicle driving environment is added, and an adaptive cruise simulation test experiment is conducted on the simulated vehicle to obtain test results.

[0028] Optionally, the calculation method of the security risk level score result in S5 is as shown in the following formula (1):

[0029] (1)

[0030] In the formula, Indicates the safety risk level score result of the ACC system under the current scoring standard in the current simulation test scenario. Indicates the number of cumulative harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the number of incident-type harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of event-type harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of event or hazardous behavior. Indicates the risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the risk factor of event-related harmful behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of event-type hazardous behavior.

[0031] On the other hand, a device for safety testing and evaluation of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario is provided, and the device is applied to a method for safety testing and evaluation of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario, and the device comprises:

[0032] The acquisition module is used to obtain unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in a curve scenario.

[0033] The building module is used to construct causal scenarios based on unsafe control behaviors and obtain the expected functional safety requirements.

[0034] The test module is used to build a simulation test scenario of vehicle adaptive cruise control in the simulation software based on the expected functional safety requirements and conduct tests to obtain test results.

[0035] The determination module is used to determine the safety evaluation dimension indicators and the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators according to the test results.

[0036] The design module is used to design a cost function, and obtain the safety risk level scoring result according to the safety evaluation dimension indicators, the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators and the cost function.

[0037] The output module is used to obtain the expected functional safety test evaluation results of adaptive cruise control in curve scenarios based on the safety risk level scoring results.

[0038] Optionally, the acquisition module is further used to:

[0039] S11. Determine safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events by conducting a system theoretical process analysis of the adaptive cruise control ACC system.

[0040] S12. Design vehicle-level safety goals based on safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events.

[0041] S13. Based on the vehicle-level hazardous events and vehicle-level safety goals, the unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in the curve scenario are obtained.

[0042] Optionally, vehicle-level hazard events, including:

[0043] The ACC function fails and the controlled vehicle collides.

[0044] Failure to change lanes on time resulted in a vehicle collision.

[0045] The driver did not respond to the lane change command and the vehicle behind him rear-ended him.

[0046] The vehicle's acceleration and deceleration exceeds the safety threshold.

[0047] The passenger accidentally touched the ACC, causing an unexpected collision with the vehicle in front.

[0048] Optionally, the building block is further used to:

[0049] S21. Construct trigger conditions and performance limitations for each unsafe control behavior, and construct causal scenarios based on the unsafe control behavior, trigger conditions, and performance limitations.

[0050] S22. Based on the causal scenarios and vehicle-level safety goals, the expected functional safety requirements are obtained.

[0051] Optionally, the test module is further configured to:

[0052] Based on the expected functional safety requirements, a vehicle dynamics model is created in the simulation software, a controller control decision algorithm is added, a vehicle driving environment is added, and an adaptive cruise simulation test experiment is conducted on the simulated vehicle to obtain test results.

[0053] Optionally, the calculation method of the security risk level score result is as shown in the following formula (1):

[0054] (1)

[0055] In the formula, Indicates the safety risk level score result of the ACC system under the current scoring standard in the current simulation test scenario. Indicates the number of cumulative harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the number of incident-type harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of event-type harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of event or hazardous behavior. Indicates the risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the risk factor of event-related harmful behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of event-type hazardous behavior.

[0056] On the other hand, an expected functional safety test and evaluation device is provided, which includes: a processor; a memory, wherein computer-readable instructions are stored on the memory, and when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, any one of the methods for expected functional safety test and evaluation of adaptive cruise in the above-mentioned curve scenario is implemented.

[0057] On the other hand, a computer-readable storage medium is provided, in which at least one instruction is stored. The at least one instruction is loaded and executed by a processor to implement any one of the above-mentioned methods for safety testing and evaluating the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario.

[0058] The beneficial effects brought about by the technical solution provided by the embodiment of the present invention include at least:

[0059] In an embodiment of the present invention, a method for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario for an autonomous vehicle is designed. After clarifying the safety constraints and vehicle-level safety goals, the hazard triggering events are analyzed to obtain the expected functional safety requirements under the control module; a simulation test scenario based on the expected functional content of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario is constructed using simulation software; the safety evaluation dimension indicators are determined by evaluating the triggering events and risk events in the ACC system, and the evaluation indicators are weighted; the safety risk level of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario is quantitatively analyzed through the designed cost function, thereby determining the safety of the current scenario; the invention can determine the risk score of events such as the expected functional safety of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario, thereby determining the importance of the test evaluation, verifying and evaluating unknown risks, and ultimately forming a method for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario for an autonomous vehicle. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0060] In order to more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention, the following briefly introduces the drawings required for use in the description of the embodiments. Obviously, the drawings described below are only some embodiments of the present invention. For ordinary technicians in this field, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative work.

[0061] Figure 1 It is a flow chart of a safety test and evaluation method for an adaptive cruise control expected function in a curve scenario provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0062] Figure 2 It is a block diagram of a safety test and evaluation device for adaptive cruise control anticipation function in a curve scenario provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0063] Figure 3 It is a structural schematic diagram of an expected functional safety test and evaluation device provided by an embodiment of the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0064] The technical solution of the present invention is described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

[0065] In the embodiments of the present invention, words such as "exemplarily" and "for example" are used to indicate examples, illustrations or explanations. Any embodiment or design described as "example" in the present invention should not be interpreted as being more preferred or more advantageous than other embodiments or designs. Specifically, the use of the word "example" is intended to present the concept in a specific way. In addition, in the embodiments of the present invention, the meaning expressed by "and / or" can be both, or it can be either of the two.

[0066] In the embodiments of the present invention, "image" and "picture" can sometimes be used interchangeably. It should be noted that when the difference between them is not emphasized, the meanings they intend to express are the same. "of", "corresponding, relevant" and "corresponding" can sometimes be used interchangeably. It should be noted that when the difference between them is not emphasized, the meanings they intend to express are the same.

[0067] In the embodiments of the present invention, sometimes the subscripts such as W 1 It may be written in non-subscript form such as W1. When the difference is not emphasized, the meaning is the same.

[0068] In order to make the technical problems, technical solutions and advantages to be solved by the present invention more clear, a detailed description will be given below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments.

[0069] An embodiment of the present invention provides a method for safety testing and evaluation of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario. The method can be implemented by an expected function safety testing and evaluation device, which can be a terminal or a server. Figure 1 The flowchart of the safety test and evaluation method of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario is shown. The processing flow of the method may include the following steps:

[0070] S1. Obtain unsafe control behaviors of autonomous driving vehicles in curve scenarios.

[0071] In a feasible implementation, based on the STPA (System Theoretic Process Analysis) of the ACC system, a curve-causing scenario is selected and relevant requirements for functional improvement are proposed.

[0072] Optionally, the above step S1 may include the following steps S11-S13:

[0073] S11. Determine safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events by conducting a system theoretical process analysis of the adaptive cruise control ACC system.

[0074] Among them, vehicle-level hazardous events may include: failure of the ACC function, resulting in a collision with the controlled vehicle; failure to change lanes on time, resulting in a vehicle collision; failure to respond to lane change instructions, resulting in a rear-end collision with the vehicle behind; the acceleration and deceleration of the vehicle exceeding the safety threshold; an occupant accidentally touching the ACC, resulting in an unexpected collision with the vehicle in front.

[0075] S12. Design vehicle-level safety goals based on safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events.

[0076] S13. Based on the vehicle-level hazardous events and vehicle-level safety goals, the unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in the curve scenario are obtained.

[0077] In a feasible implementation, based on the system theoretical process analysis of the ACC system, a curve-causing scenario is selected and relevant requirements for functional improvement are proposed. In order to obtain the SOTIF requirements of the ACC system, it is necessary to analyze each step through the system theoretical process analysis method. First, clarify the safety constraints and analyze all possible vehicle-level hazardous events. Secondly, divide the main vehicle-level hazardous events and the vehicle-level safety goals involved in the subsequent analysis, and finally derive the expected functional safety requirements under the control module.

[0078] Furthermore, the STPA method can analyze any losses that are unacceptable to the relevant participants (loss of life, property, and transportation). For the ACC system, the following four types can be defined:

[0079] L-1: Personal injury (including drivers and traffic scene participants);

[0080] L-2: Damage to vehicles (including own vehicle and other vehicles);

[0081] L-3: Traffic mission failed;

[0082] L-4: Environmental damage.

[0083] Based on the analysis of ACC functions, the vehicle-level hazardous events shown in Table 1 below can be obtained.

[0084] Table 1

[0085]

[0086] Combined with the content analyzed in Table 1 above, the vehicle-level safety goals can be listed as shown in Table 2. In the subsequent analysis, the following goals must always be met to prevent the occurrence of danger.

[0087] Table 2

[0088]

[0089] UCA (Unsafety Control Action) refers to control behaviors that occur in certain special scenarios and can lead to vehicle-level hazardous events. It is generally listed by distinguishing the source of the behavior, the control behavior that caused it or the corresponding guide words that define it, and the hazards caused by the behavior. Similar to the guide words given in the hazard and operability analysis theory, based on the vehicle's control behavior, it can be analyzed from the following aspects:

[0090] G-1: Required but not provided;

[0091] G-2: Not required, but provided;

[0092] G-3: Required, but the control signal is too large / too small;

[0093] G-4: Yes, but the timing of providing the control signal is incorrect.

[0094] By integrating the ACC system architecture analyzed above and the events that may cause the vehicle driving task failure during driving, the unsafe control behaviors of the ACC system shown in Table 3 below can be obtained.

[0095] Table 3

[0096]

[0097] S2. Based on the unsafe control behavior, construct the causal scenario and obtain the expected functional safety requirements.

[0098] In a feasible implementation, the potentially dangerous behaviors of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario are identified, and the expected functional safety issues of the adaptive cruise control in the curve scenario are analyzed.

[0099] Optionally, the above step S2 may include the following steps S21-S22:

[0100] S21. Construct trigger conditions and performance limitations for each unsafe control behavior, and construct causal scenarios based on the unsafe control behavior, trigger conditions, and performance limitations.

[0101] S22. Based on the causal scenarios and vehicle-level safety goals, the expected functional safety requirements are obtained.

[0102] In a feasible implementation, the vehicle driving environment simulates a road scene of real road conditions, which shows the geometric structure, physical properties and dynamic behavior characteristics of road elements, aiming to provide a highly simulated driving environment.

[0103] Furthermore, when performing step S2, firstly, based on the detailed analysis results of step S1, a variety of test scenarios are identified and defined. Then, for each test scenario, its key parameters are extracted: road geometry, traffic flow, weather conditions, etc., and the final test scenario is determined in combination with the external environment and vehicle control.

[0104] Trigger scenarios usually include trigger conditions and performance limitations. When a single trigger condition or performance limitation acts on the vehicle, it will not lead to unsafe control behavior. Only when both occur at the same time, it will lead to insufficient functions and thus cause unsafe control behavior. The causal scenarios are shown in Table 4:

[0105] Table 4

[0106]

[0107] The ACC module SOTIF requirements focus on the decision-making control module of the ACC system, and use functional improvement methods to broaden the application scenarios of traditional control strategies, thereby achieving the goal of expected functional safety of the entire vehicle. The ACC system SOTIF requirements are shown in Table 5 below:

[0108] Table 5

[0109]

[0110] S3. Based on the expected functional safety requirements, a simulation test scenario for vehicle adaptive cruise control is constructed in the simulation software and tested to obtain test results.

[0111] Specifically, constructing a simulation test scenario for vehicle adaptive cruise control in simulation software and conducting a test may include: creating a vehicle dynamics model in the simulation software, adding a controller control decision algorithm, adding a vehicle driving environment, and conducting an adaptive cruise simulation test experiment on the simulated vehicle to obtain test results.

[0112] In a feasible implementation, after analyzing and obtaining the triggering event of the adaptive cruise control in the curve scene, the autonomous driving vehicle is tested for the specific triggering event, which specifically includes the following steps:

[0113] (1) Analyze and identify trigger events to obtain different test scenarios and determine the final test scenario.

[0114] When determining the final test scenario, extract the key parameters in different test scenarios, give the distribution range of the key parameters using real data or theoretical analysis methods, and combine external environment, vehicle control and other factors to obtain the final test scenario.

[0115] (2) Construct autonomous driving vehicle simulation test scenarios in simulation software.

[0116] In the process of vehicle development, Simulink is often used in conjunction with vehicle dynamics simulation software such as Carsim. Carsim focuses on the simulation of vehicle dynamics, while Simulink provides a powerful modeling and simulation environment. Through joint simulation, comprehensive simulation and analysis of vehicle power, stability, braking and other performance can be achieved, providing strong support for vehicle design and optimization of control systems. The simulation software of the present invention specifically uses Carsim and Simulink software.

[0117] Building a simulation test scenario for an autonomous driving vehicle mainly includes the following steps:

[0118] B1 Establishing an autonomous driving vehicle dynamics model in the simulation software Carsim

[0119] B2 Add the same control decision algorithm as the actual vehicle in the simulation software Simulink.

[0120] The adaptive cruise control decision algorithm is imported into the simulation environment, and the data is sent to the constructed vehicle dynamics module to control the vehicle to drive normally in the simulation environment.

[0121] B3 Add vehicle driving environment in the simulation software Carsim.

[0122] According to the real vehicle driving environment, the corresponding road scene, namely the curve scene, is added to the simulation software. Among them, the road scene is used to simulate the geometric characteristics, physical characteristics and behavioral characteristics of the road scene elements in the real environment.

[0123] (3) Conduct a scenario simulation test experiment on the simulated autonomous driving vehicle's adaptive cruise control system in an autonomous driving vehicle curve simulation test scenario.

[0124] S4. Determine the safety evaluation dimension indicators and the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators based on the test results.

[0125] S5. Design a cost function, and obtain the safety risk level scoring result according to the safety evaluation dimension indicators, the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators and the cost function.

[0126] In a feasible implementation, the evaluation index and the weight coefficient of the evaluation index are determined, and the safety risk level of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario is quantitatively analyzed through a designed cost function.

[0127] Specifically, based on the previous functional definition of the ACC system and the functional standard specifications for the ACC system specified by the national standard GB / T 20608-2006, the expected functional safety evaluation dimensions shown in Table 6 below can be extracted.

[0128] Table 6

[0129]

[0130] Build an evaluation system framework. According to the functional definition of the ACC system, the expected functional safety evaluation dimensions shown in Table 7 below can be extracted. If the control algorithm proposed in the present invention is to be proven to be safe, it is not only necessary to ensure that the current driving task can be successfully completed under the corresponding causal scenario to ensure the personal safety of the occupants; it is also necessary to always maintain a reasonable longitudinal and lateral safety state with the vehicle in front during driving, and provide the vehicle with control signals that meet design expectations.

[0131] Table 7

[0132]

[0133] The numbers starting with CHA represent cumulative hazardous behaviors. The weight coefficients are determined based on SOTIF's emphasis and acceptance of the indicators for ACC function improvement. The weights corresponding to safety-related indicators will be higher. The numbers starting with EHA correspond to event-type hazardous behaviors. If they occur, it proves that there are huge security loopholes in the control algorithm, which is completely unacceptable in the design process. Therefore, the corresponding weights are the largest.

[0134] The results of different control algorithms are calculated by designing cost functions, and the safety risk level scores in the docking scenario are shown in Table 8 below:

[0135] Table 8

[0136]

[0137] Optionally, the calculation method of the security risk level score result in S5 is as shown in the following formula (1):

[0138] (1)

[0139] In the formula, It indicates the risk score of the operation result of the ACC system under the current scoring standard in the current simulation test scenario. If the calculated value is high, it can be considered that the expected functional safety problem of the current control algorithm in the current operation test scenario has not been solved, and there are major safety hazards, which may easily cause the driving task to fail. In other words, it proves that the functional improvement goal of the control module has not been achieved. Correspondingly, the lower the value, the more the safety of the vehicle in the current scenario can be guaranteed. and The weighted values ​​corresponding to a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior and event harmful behavior respectively; and Corresponding to the risk coefficients of the above two behaviors respectively.

[0140] S6. Based on the safety risk level scoring results, the expected functional safety test evaluation results of adaptive cruise control in the curve scenario are obtained.

[0141] In a feasible implementation, the expected functional safety of the vehicle's adaptive cruise control is evaluated and analyzed to form a test evaluation system.

[0142] The above calculation results are analyzed to determine the risk levels of different dangerous behaviors in the curve scenario. A low score indicates a higher level of expected functional safety of the system, and a high score indicates a higher level of danger. By verifying the unknown risks of the expected functional safety of the autonomous driving vehicle, the rationality of the existing risks can be determined. During the scenario testing process, when there are actual behaviors that lead to dangerous incidents, the rationality of the risks can be verified through quantitative evaluation of the test results, and the expected functional safety of the autonomous driving vehicle can be determined, thus forming a set of test evaluation processes.

[0143] In an embodiment of the present invention, a method for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario for an autonomous vehicle is designed. After clarifying the safety constraints and vehicle-level safety goals, the hazard triggering events are analyzed to obtain the expected functional safety requirements under the control module; a simulation test scenario based on the expected functional content of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario is constructed using simulation software; the safety evaluation dimension indicators are determined by evaluating the triggering events and risk events in the ACC system, and the evaluation indicators are weighted; the safety risk level of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario is quantitatively analyzed through the designed cost function, thereby determining the safety of the current scenario; the invention can determine the risk score of events such as the expected functional safety of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario, thereby determining the importance of the test evaluation, verifying and evaluating unknown risks, and ultimately forming a method for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario for an autonomous vehicle.

[0144] Figure 2 The block diagram of a device for safety testing and evaluation of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scene according to an exemplary embodiment is shown. The device is used for a method for safety testing and evaluation of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scene. Figure 2 The device includes an acquisition module 310, a construction module 320, a test module 330, a determination module 340, a design module 350 and an output module 360. Among them:

[0145] The acquisition module 310 is used to obtain unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in a curve scenario.

[0146] The construction module 320 is used to construct a causal scenario based on the unsafe control behavior, and then obtain the expected functional safety requirements.

[0147] The test module 330 is used to construct a simulation test scenario of vehicle adaptive cruise control in the simulation software based on the expected functional safety requirements and perform the test to obtain the test results.

[0148] The determination module 340 is used to determine the safety evaluation dimension indicators and the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators according to the test results.

[0149] The design module 350 is used to design a cost function, and obtain a safety risk level scoring result according to the safety evaluation dimension index, the weight coefficient of the safety evaluation dimension index and the cost function.

[0150] The output module 360 ​​is used to obtain the expected functional safety test evaluation result of the adaptive cruise control in the curve scenario according to the safety risk level scoring result.

[0151] Optionally, the acquisition module 310 is further configured to:

[0152] S11. Determine safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events by conducting a system theoretical process analysis of the adaptive cruise control ACC system.

[0153] S12. Design vehicle-level safety goals based on safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events.

[0154] S13. Based on the vehicle-level hazardous events and vehicle-level safety goals, the unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in the curve scenario are obtained.

[0155] Optionally, vehicle-level hazard events, including:

[0156] The ACC function fails and the controlled vehicle collides.

[0157] Failure to change lanes on time resulted in a vehicle collision.

[0158] The driver did not respond to the lane change command and the vehicle behind him rear-ended him.

[0159] The vehicle's acceleration and deceleration exceeds the safety threshold.

[0160] The passenger accidentally touched the ACC, causing an unexpected collision with the vehicle in front.

[0161] Optionally, the construction module 320 is further configured to:

[0162] S21. Construct trigger conditions and performance limitations for each unsafe control behavior, and construct causal scenarios based on the unsafe control behavior, trigger conditions, and performance limitations.

[0163] S22. Based on the causal scenarios and vehicle-level safety goals, the expected functional safety requirements are obtained.

[0164] Optionally, the testing module 330 is further configured to:

[0165] Based on the expected functional safety requirements, a vehicle dynamics model is created in the simulation software, a controller control decision algorithm is added, a vehicle driving environment is added, and an adaptive cruise simulation test experiment is conducted on the simulated vehicle to obtain test results.

[0166] Optionally, the calculation method of the security risk level score result is as shown in the following formula (1):

[0167] (1)

[0168] In the formula, Indicates the safety risk level score result of the ACC system under the current scoring standard in the current simulation test scenario. Indicates the number of cumulative harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the number of incident-type harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of event-type harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of event or hazardous behavior. Indicates the risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the risk factor of event-related harmful behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of event-type hazardous behavior.

[0169] In an embodiment of the present invention, a method for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario for an autonomous vehicle is designed. After clarifying the safety constraints and vehicle-level safety goals, the hazard triggering events are analyzed to obtain the expected functional safety requirements under the control module; a simulation test scenario based on the expected functional content of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario is constructed using simulation software; the safety evaluation dimension indicators are determined by evaluating the triggering events and risk events in the ACC system, and the evaluation indicators are weighted; the safety risk level of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario is quantitatively analyzed through the designed cost function, thereby determining the safety of the current scenario; the invention can determine the risk score of events such as the expected functional safety of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario, thereby determining the importance of the test evaluation, verifying and evaluating unknown risks, and ultimately forming a method for testing and evaluating the expected functional safety of the adaptive cruise control in a curved scenario for an autonomous vehicle.

[0170] Figure 3 is a schematic diagram of the structure of an expected functional safety test and evaluation device provided by an embodiment of the present invention, such as Figure 3As shown, the expected functional safety test and evaluation equipment may include the above Figure 3 The device for testing and evaluating the expected function safety of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario is shown. Optionally, the device for testing and evaluating the expected function safety 410 may include a first processor 2001 .

[0171] Optionally, the intended functional safety test and evaluation device 410 may further include a memory 2002 and a transceiver 2003 .

[0172] The first processor 2001, the memory 2002 and the transceiver 2003 may be connected via a communication bus.

[0173] Combine the following Figure 3 The components of the intended functional safety test and evaluation device 410 are introduced in detail:

[0174] The first processor 2001 is the control center of the expected functional safety test and evaluation device 410, which can be a processor or a general term for multiple processing elements. For example, the first processor 2001 is one or more central processing units (CPUs), or an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), or one or more integrated circuits configured to implement the embodiments of the present invention, such as one or more microprocessors (digital signal processors, DSPs), or one or more field programmable gate arrays (field programmable gate arrays, FPGAs).

[0175] Optionally, the first processor 2001 may perform various functions of the intended functional safety test and evaluation device 410 by running or executing a software program stored in the memory 2002 and calling data stored in the memory 2002 .

[0176] In a specific implementation, as an embodiment, the first processor 2001 may include one or more CPUs, such as Figure 3 CPU0 and CPU1 are shown in FIG.

[0177] In a specific implementation, as an embodiment, the expected functional safety test and evaluation device 410 may also include multiple processors, such as Figure 3The first processor 2001 and the second processor 2004 are shown in FIG. Each of these processors may be a single-core processor (single-CPU) or a multi-core processor (multi-CPU). The processor here may refer to one or more devices, circuits, and / or processing cores for processing data (e.g., computer program instructions).

[0178] The memory 2002 is used to store the software program for executing the solution of the present invention, and is controlled to be executed by the first processor 2001. The specific implementation method can refer to the above method embodiment, which will not be repeated here.

[0179] Optionally, the memory 2002 may be a read-only memory (ROM) or other types of static storage devices that can store static information and instructions, a random access memory (RAM) or other types of dynamic storage devices that can store information and instructions, or an electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), a compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM) or other optical disc storage, optical disc storage (including compressed optical disc, laser disc, optical disc, digital versatile disc, Blu-ray disc, etc.), a magnetic disk storage medium or other magnetic storage device, or any other medium that can be used to carry or store the desired program code in the form of instructions or data structures and can be accessed by a computer, but is not limited thereto. The memory 2002 may be integrated with the first processor 2001, or may exist independently, and may be tested by the interface circuit ( Figure 3 (not shown) is coupled to the first processor 2001, which is not specifically limited in this embodiment of the present invention.

[0180] The transceiver 2003 is used to communicate with a network device or a terminal device.

[0181] Optionally, the transceiver 2003 may include a receiver and a transmitter ( Figure 3 The receiver is used to implement a receiving function, and the transmitter is used to implement a sending function.

[0182] Optionally, the transceiver 2003 may be integrated with the first processor 2001, or may exist independently, and the interface circuit ( Figure 3 (not shown) is coupled to the first processor 2001, which is not specifically limited in this embodiment of the present invention.

[0183] It should be noted that Figure 3 The structure of the expected functional safety test and evaluation device 410 shown in the figure does not constitute a limitation on the router, and the actual knowledge structure identification device may include more or fewer components than shown in the figure, or combine certain components, or arrange the components differently.

[0184] In addition, the technical effects of the expected functional safety test and evaluation device 410 can refer to the technical effects of the adaptive cruise expected functional safety test and evaluation method in the curve scenario described in the above method embodiment, and will not be repeated here.

[0185] It should be understood that the first processor 2001 in the embodiment of the present invention may be a central processing unit (CPU), and the processor may also be other general-purpose processors, digital signal processors (DSP), application specific integrated circuits (ASIC), field programmable gate arrays (FPGA) or other programmable logic devices, discrete gate or transistor logic devices, discrete hardware components, etc. A general-purpose processor may be a microprocessor or the processor may also be any conventional processor, etc.

[0186] It should also be understood that the memory in the embodiments of the present invention may be a volatile memory or a non-volatile memory, or may include both volatile and non-volatile memories. Among them, the non-volatile memory may be a read-only memory (ROM), a programmable read-only memory (PROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), an electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), or a flash memory. The volatile memory may be a random access memory (RAM), which is used as an external cache. By way of example and not limitation, many forms of random access memory (RAM) are available, such as static RAM (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), synchronous DRAM (SDRAM), double data rate synchronous dynamic random access memory (DDR SDRAM), enhanced synchronous dynamic random access memory (ESDRAM), synchronous link DRAM (SLDRAM), and direct rambus RAM (DR RAM).

[0187] The above embodiments can be implemented in whole or in part by software, hardware (such as circuits), firmware or any other combination. When implemented by software, the above embodiments can be implemented in whole or in part in the form of a computer program product. The computer program product includes one or more computer instructions or computer programs. When the computer instructions or computer programs are loaded or executed on a computer, the process or function described in the embodiment of the present invention is generated in whole or in part. The computer can be a general-purpose computer, a special-purpose computer, a computer network, or other programmable device. The computer instructions can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium, or transmitted from one computer-readable storage medium to another computer-readable storage medium. For example, the computer instructions can be transmitted from one website, computer, server or data center to another website, computer, server or data center by wired (such as infrared, wireless, microwave, etc.). The computer-readable storage medium can be any available medium that can be accessed by a computer or a data storage device such as a server or data center that contains one or more available media sets. The available medium can be a magnetic medium (for example, a floppy disk, a hard disk, a tape), an optical medium (for example, a DVD), or a semiconductor medium. The semiconductor medium can be a solid-state hard disk.

[0188] It should be understood that the term "and / or" in this article is only a description of the association relationship of associated objects, indicating that there can be three relationships. For example, A and / or B can represent: A exists alone, A and B exist at the same time, and B exists alone. A and B can be singular or plural. In addition, the character " / " in this article generally indicates that the associated objects before and after are in an "or" relationship, but it may also indicate an "and / or" relationship. Please refer to the context for specific understanding.

[0189] In the present invention, "at least one" means one or more, and "plurality" means two or more. "At least one of the following" or similar expressions refers to any combination of these items, including any combination of single items or plural items. For example, at least one of a, b, or c can mean: a, b, c, ab, ac, bc, or abc, where a, b, and c can be single or multiple.

[0190] It should be understood that in various embodiments of the present invention, the size of the serial numbers of the above-mentioned processes does not mean the order of execution. The execution order of each process should be determined by its function and internal logic, and should not constitute any limitation on the implementation process of the embodiments of the present invention.

[0191] Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the units and algorithm steps of each example described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are performed in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Professional and technical personnel can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered to be beyond the scope of the present invention.

[0192] Those skilled in the art can clearly understand that, for the convenience and brevity of description, the specific working processes of the above-described equipment, devices and units can refer to the corresponding processes in the aforementioned method embodiments and will not be repeated here.

[0193] In the several embodiments provided by the present invention, it should be understood that the disclosed devices, apparatuses and methods can be implemented in other ways. For example, the device embodiments described above are only schematic. For example, the division of the units is only a logical function division. There may be other division methods in actual implementation, such as multiple units or components can be combined or integrated into another device, or some features can be ignored or not executed. Another point is that the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed can be through some interfaces, indirect coupling or communication connection of devices or units, which can be electrical, mechanical or other forms.

[0194] The units described as separate components may or may not be physically separated, and the components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed on multiple network units. Some or all of the units may be selected according to actual needs to achieve the purpose of the solution of this embodiment.

[0195] In addition, each functional unit in each embodiment of the present invention may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit.

[0196] If the functions are implemented in the form of software functional units and sold or used as independent products, they can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium. Based on this understanding, the technical solution of the present invention, or the part that contributes to the prior art, or the part of the technical solution, can be embodied in the form of a software product. The computer software product is stored in a storage medium, including several instructions for enabling a computer device (which can be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to perform all or part of the steps of the methods described in various embodiments of the present invention. The aforementioned storage medium includes: U disk, mobile hard disk, read-only memory (ROM), random access memory (RAM), disk or optical disk, and other media that can store program codes.

[0197] The above is only a specific embodiment of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any person skilled in the art can easily think of changes or substitutions within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention, which should be included in the protection scope of the present invention. Therefore, the protection scope of the present invention should be based on the protection scope of the claims.

Claims

1. A safety test and evaluation method for the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario, characterized in that: The method comprises: S1. Obtain unsafe control behaviors of autonomous driving vehicles in curve scenarios; S2. Based on the unsafe control behavior, construct the causal scenario and obtain the expected functional safety requirements; S3. Based on the expected functional safety requirements, construct a simulation test scenario for vehicle adaptive cruise control in the simulation software and perform a test to obtain a test result; S4. Determine the safety evaluation dimension index and the weight coefficient of the safety evaluation dimension index according to the test results; S5. Design a cost function, and obtain a safety risk level scoring result according to the safety evaluation dimension indicators, the weight coefficients of the safety evaluation dimension indicators, and the cost function; S6. According to the safety risk level scoring result, the expected functional safety test evaluation result of the adaptive cruise control in the curve scenario is obtained.

2. The safety test and evaluation method for the adaptive cruise control expected function in a curve scenario according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The step S1 of obtaining unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in a curve scenario includes: S11. Determine safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events by conducting system theoretical process analysis on the adaptive cruise control ACC system; S12. Designing vehicle-level safety goals based on the safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events; S13. According to the vehicle-level hazardous events and vehicle-level safety goals, unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in a curve scenario are obtained.

3. The safety test and evaluation method for the adaptive cruise control expected function in a curve scenario according to claim 2 is characterized in that: The vehicle-level hazard events in S11 include: The ACC function fails and the controlled vehicle collides; Failure to change lanes on time, resulting in a vehicle collision; Failure to respond to lane change instructions, resulting in rear-end collision with the vehicle behind; The acceleration and deceleration of the vehicle exceeds the safety threshold; The passenger accidentally touched the ACC, causing an unexpected collision with the vehicle in front.

4. The safety test and evaluation method for the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In S2, a causal scenario is constructed according to the unsafe control behavior, thereby obtaining the expected functional safety requirements, including: S21. Construct trigger conditions and performance limitations for each unsafe control behavior, and construct causal scenarios based on the unsafe control behavior, trigger conditions, and performance limitations; S22. Obtain the expected functional safety requirements based on the causal scenarios and vehicle-level safety goals.

5. The safety test and evaluation method for the adaptive cruise control expected function in a curve scenario according to claim 1 is characterized in that: In S3, based on the expected functional safety requirements, a simulation test scenario of vehicle adaptive cruise control is constructed in the simulation software and tested to obtain test results, including: Based on the expected functional safety requirements, a vehicle dynamics model is created in the simulation software, a controller control decision algorithm is added, a vehicle driving environment is added, and an adaptive cruise simulation test experiment is performed on the simulated vehicle to obtain test results.

6. The method for safety testing and evaluation of the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario according to claim 1 is characterized in that: The calculation method of the security risk level score result in S5 is shown in the following formula (1): （1） In the formula, Indicates the safety risk level score result of the ACC system under the current scoring standard in the current simulation test scenario. Indicates the number of cumulative harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of cumulative harmful behavior, Indicates the number of incident-type harmful behaviors, Represents the weighted value of a certain type of event-type harmful behavior, Indicates the risk factor of a certain type of event or hazardous behavior. Indicates the risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of cumulative hazardous behavior, Indicates the risk factor of event-related harmful behavior, Indicates the critical risk factor of event-type hazardous behavior.

7. A safety test and evaluation device for an adaptive cruise control function under a curve scenario, the safety test and evaluation device for an adaptive cruise control function under a curve scenario is used to implement the safety test and evaluation method for an adaptive cruise control function under a curve scenario as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 6, characterized in that: The device comprises: An acquisition module is used to acquire unsafe control behaviors of an autonomous driving vehicle in a curve scenario; A construction module, used to construct a causal scenario according to the unsafe control behavior, and then obtain the expected functional safety requirements; A test module, used to construct a simulation test scenario of vehicle adaptive cruise control in the simulation software based on the expected functional safety requirements and perform the test to obtain the test results; A determination module, used to determine the safety evaluation dimension index and the weight coefficient of the safety evaluation dimension index according to the test results; A design module is used to design a cost function, and obtain a safety risk level scoring result according to the safety evaluation dimension indicator, the weight coefficient of the safety evaluation dimension indicator and the cost function; The output module is used to obtain the expected functional safety test evaluation result of the adaptive cruise control in the curve scenario according to the safety risk level scoring result.

8. The device for safety testing and evaluating the expected function of adaptive cruise control in a curve scenario according to claim 7 is characterized in that: The acquisition module is used to: S11. Determine safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events by conducting system theoretical process analysis on the adaptive cruise control ACC system; S12. Designing vehicle-level safety goals based on the safety constraints and vehicle-level hazard events; S13. According to the vehicle-level hazardous events and vehicle-level safety goals, unsafe control behaviors of the autonomous driving vehicle in a curve scenario are obtained.

9. An intended functional safety test and evaluation device, characterized in that: The intended functional safety test and evaluation equipment includes: processor; A memory having computer-readable instructions stored thereon, wherein when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6 is implemented.

10. A computer-readable storage medium, characterized in that: The computer-readable storage medium stores program codes, which can be called by a processor to execute the method according to any one of claims 1 to 6.

Images