Specification, Implementation and Verification of Dynamic Group Membership for Vehicle Coordination

Asplund, Mikael; Lövhall, Jakob; Villani, Emília

doi:10.1109/prdc.2017.57

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The task of the Group membership protocol is to use this information to provide an as accurate view of the vehicles in the vicinity as possible. We have previously presented a protocol for this purpose [4].…”

Section: Formalising Secure Group Membershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We now introduce two separate correctness properties that relate how well a view represents the real world (as modelled by the configuration function c). In previous work [4], we made similar nonformal definitions for view correctness as well as a notion of freshness. Here we remove the time aspect and provide a stronger theoretical foundation to be able to formally prove view properties.…”

Section: View Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Untitled

2019

ACM Trans. Cyber-Phys. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coordinated vehicles for intelligent traffic management are instances of cyber-physical systems with strict correctness requirements. A key building block for these systems is the ability to establish a group membership view that accurately captures the locations of all vehicles in a particular area of interest. In this article, we formally define view correctness in terms of soundness and completeness and establish theoretical bounds for the ability to verify view correctness. Moreover, we present an architecture for an online view detection and verification process that uses the information available locally to a vehicle. This architecture uses an SMT solver to automatically prove view correctness (if possible). We evaluate this architecture using both synthetic and trace-based scenarios and demonstrate that the ability to verify view correctness is on par with the ability to detect view violations.

show abstract

Section: Formalising Secure Group Membershipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: View Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Untitled

2019

ACM Trans. Cyber-Phys. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We consider a fully connected network where each vehicle can communicate with all nearby vehicles. We assume the access to a group membership service [ 15 , 16 , 17 ] that monitors the set of recently live and connected participants as well as the existence of a best-effort (single round) dissemination (gossip) protocol. Moreover, every system component has access to a common global clock by calling the function

(such sub-microsecond offsets are widely available and could be implemented, say, using global positioning systems, GPS).…”

Section: System Settingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Group communication systems [ 14 ] treat a group of participants as a single communication endpoint. The group membership service [ 15 , 16 , 17 ] monitors the set of recently live and connected participating system components whereas the multicast service delivers messages to that group under some delivery guarantees, such as delivery acknowledgment. In this paper, we assume the availability of a membership service and a best-effort (single round solution) dissemination (multicast) protocol that has no delivery acknowledgment (but might offer probabilistic guarantees).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Stop Disagreeing and Start Cooperatingin the Presence of Asymmetric Packet Loss

Morales-Ponce

Schiller

Falcone

2018

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We consider the design of a disagreement correction protocol in multi-vehicle systems. Vehicles broadcast in real-time vital information such as position, direction, speed, acceleration, intention, etc. This information is then used to identify the risks and adapt their trajectory to maintain the highest performance without compromising the safety. To minimize the risk due to the use of inconsistent information, all cooperating vehicles must agree whether to use the exchanged information to operate in a cooperative mode or use the only local information to operate in an autonomous mode. However, since wireless communications are prone to failures, it is impossible to deterministically reach an agreement. Therefore, any protocol will exhibit necessary disagreement periods. In this paper, we investigate whether vehicles can still cooperate despite communication failures even in the scenario where communication is suddenly not available. We present a deterministic protocol that allows all participants to either operate a cooperative mode when vehicles can exchange all the information in a timely manner or operate in autonomous mode when messages are lost. We show formally that the disagreement time is bounded by the time that the communication channel requires to deliver messages and validate our protocol using NS-3 simulations. We explain how the proposed solution can be used in vehicular platooning to attain high performance and still guarantee high safety standards despite communication failures.

show abstract