{"title":"Are Existing Road Design Guidelines Suitable for Autonomous Vehicles?","authors":"Yang Sun, Christopher M. Poskitt, Jun Sun","doi":"arxiv-2409.10562","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The emergence of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) has spurred research into testing\nthe resilience of their perception systems, i.e. to ensure they are not\nsusceptible to making critical misjudgements. It is important that they are\ntested not only with respect to other vehicles on the road, but also those\nobjects placed on the roadside. Trash bins, billboards, and greenery are all\nexamples of such objects, typically placed according to guidelines that were\ndeveloped for the human visual system, and which may not align perfectly with\nthe needs of AVs. Existing tests, however, usually focus on adversarial objects\nwith conspicuous shapes/patches, that are ultimately unrealistic given their\nunnatural appearances and the need for white box knowledge. In this work, we\nintroduce a black box attack on the perception systems of AVs, in which the\nobjective is to create realistic adversarial scenarios (i.e. satisfying road\ndesign guidelines) by manipulating the positions of common roadside objects,\nand without resorting to `unnatural' adversarial patches. In particular, we\npropose TrashFuzz , a fuzzing algorithm to find scenarios in which the\nplacement of these objects leads to substantial misperceptions by the AV --\nsuch as mistaking a traffic light's colour -- with overall the goal of causing\nit to violate traffic laws. To ensure the realism of these scenarios, they must\nsatisfy several rules encoding regulatory guidelines about the placement of\nobjects on public streets. We implemented and evaluated these attacks for the\nApollo, finding that TrashFuzz induced it into violating 15 out of 24 different\ntraffic laws.","PeriodicalId":501278,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Software Engineering","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Software Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2409.10562","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The emergence of Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) has spurred research into testing
the resilience of their perception systems, i.e. to ensure they are not
susceptible to making critical misjudgements. It is important that they are
tested not only with respect to other vehicles on the road, but also those
objects placed on the roadside. Trash bins, billboards, and greenery are all
examples of such objects, typically placed according to guidelines that were
developed for the human visual system, and which may not align perfectly with
the needs of AVs. Existing tests, however, usually focus on adversarial objects
with conspicuous shapes/patches, that are ultimately unrealistic given their
unnatural appearances and the need for white box knowledge. In this work, we
introduce a black box attack on the perception systems of AVs, in which the
objective is to create realistic adversarial scenarios (i.e. satisfying road
design guidelines) by manipulating the positions of common roadside objects,
and without resorting to `unnatural' adversarial patches. In particular, we
propose TrashFuzz , a fuzzing algorithm to find scenarios in which the
placement of these objects leads to substantial misperceptions by the AV --
such as mistaking a traffic light's colour -- with overall the goal of causing
it to violate traffic laws. To ensure the realism of these scenarios, they must
satisfy several rules encoding regulatory guidelines about the placement of
objects on public streets. We implemented and evaluated these attacks for the
Apollo, finding that TrashFuzz induced it into violating 15 out of 24 different
traffic laws.