SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2412.07485

Performance Evaluation of ROS2-DDS middleware implementations facilitating Cooperative Driving in Autonomous Vehicle

Abstract

In the autonomous vehicle and self-driving paradigm, cooperative perception or exchanging sensor information among vehicles over wireless communication has added a new dimension. Generally, an autonomous vehicle is a special type of robot that requires real-time, highly reliable sensor inputs due to functional safety. Autonomous vehicles are equipped with a considerable number of sensors to provide different required sensor data to make the driving decision and share with other surrounding vehicles. The inclusion of Data Distribution Service(DDS) as a communication middleware in ROS2 has proved its potential capability to be a reliable real-time distributed system. DDS comes with a scoping mechanism known as domain. Whenever a ROS2 process is initiated, it creates a DDS participant. It is important to note that there is a limit to the number of participants allowed in a single domain. The efficient handling of numerous in-vehicle sensors and their messages demands the use of multiple ROS2 nodes in a single vehicle. Additionally, in the cooperative perception paradigm, a significant number of ROS2 nodes can be required when a vehicle functions as a single ROS2 node. These ROS2 nodes cannot be part of a single domain due to DDS participant limitation; thus, different domain communication is unavoidable. Moreover, there are different vendor-specific implementations of DDS, and each vendor has their configurations, which is an inevitable communication catalyst between the ROS2 nodes. The communication between vehicles or robots or ROS2 nodes depends directly on the vendor-specific configuration, data type, data size, and the DDS implementation used as middleware; in our study, we evaluate and investigate the limitations, capabilities, and prospects of the different domain communication for various vendor-specific DDS implementations for diverse sensor data type.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Sumit Paul, Danh Lephuoc, Manfred Hauswirth. 2024-12-10. Performance Evaluation of ROS2-DDS middleware implementations facilitating Cooperative Driving in Autonomous Vehicle. https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.07485

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO