Document Open Access Logo

A Knowledge-Based Analysis of Intersection Protocols

Authors Kaya Alpturer , Joseph Y. Halpern , Ron van der Meyden

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.DISC.2024.2.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.87 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Kaya Alpturer
  • Princeton University, NJ, USA
Joseph Y. Halpern
  • Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Ron van der Meyden
  • UNSW Sydney, Australia

Funding

  • Alpturer, Kaya: Research supported by AFOSR grant FA23862114029. Work done in part while the author was studying at Cornell University.
  • Halpern, Joseph Y.: Research supported in part by AFOSR grant FA23862114029, NSF grant FMitF 2319186, ARO grant W911NF-22-1-0061, and MURI grant W911NF-19-1-0217.
  • van der Meyden, Ron: The Commonwealth of Australia (represented by the Defence Science and Technology Group) supported this research through a Defence Science Partnerships agreement.

Cite As Get BibTex

Kaya Alpturer, Joseph Y. Halpern, and Ron van der Meyden. A Knowledge-Based Analysis of Intersection Protocols. In 38th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 319, pp. 2:1-2:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DISC.2024.2

Abstract

The increasing wireless communication capabilities of vehicles creates opportunities for more efficient intersection management strategies. One promising approach is the replacement of traffic lights with a system wherein vehicles run protocols among themselves to determine right of way. In this paper, we define the intersection problem to model this scenario abstractly, without any assumptions on the specific structure of the intersection or a bound on the number of vehicles. Protocols solving the intersection problem must guarantee safety (no collisions) and liveness (every vehicle eventually goes through). In addition, we would like these protocols to satisfy various optimality criteria, some of which turn out to be achievable only in a subset of the contexts. In particular, we show a partial equivalence between eliminating unnecessary waiting, a criterion of interest in the distributed mutual-exclusion literature, and a notion of optimality that we define called lexicographical optimality. We then introduce a framework to design protocols for the intersection problem by converting an intersection policy, which is based on a global view of the intersection, to a protocol that can be run by the vehicles through the use of knowledge-based programs. Our protocols are shown to guarantee safety and liveness while also being optimal under sufficient conditions on the context. Finally, we investigate protocols in the presence of faulty vehicles that experience communication failures and older vehicles with limited communication capabilities. We show that intersection protocols can be made safe, live and optimal even in the presence of faulty behavior.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Distributed algorithms
  • Computer systems organization → Dependable and fault-tolerant systems and networks
  • Computing methodologies → Reasoning about belief and knowledge
Keywords
  • Intersection management
  • Autonomous vehicles
  • Distributed algorithms
  • Epistemic logic
  • Fault tolerance

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Related Versions

References

  1. K. Alpturer, J. Y. Halpern, and R. van der Meyden. Optimal eventual Byzantine agreement protocols with omission failures. In Proc. 42nd ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, pages 244-252, 2023. Google Scholar
  2. K. Alpturer, J. Y. Halpern, and R. van der Meyden. A knowledge-based analysis of intersection protocols, 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.09499.
  3. Guy E. Blelloch, Perry Cheng, and Phillip B. Gibbons. Room synchronizations. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA 2001, Heraklion, Crete Island, Greece, July 4-6, 2001, SPAA '01, pages 122-133, New York, NY, USA, 2001. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/378580.378605.
  4. U. Bonollo, R. van der Meyden, and E.A. Sonenberg. Knowledge-based specification: Investigating distributed mutual exclusion. In Bar Ilan Symposium on Foundations of AI, 2001. URL: https://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~meyden/research/bisfai.pdf.
  5. António Casimiro, Jörg Kaiser, Elad M. Schiller, Pedro Costa, José Parizi, Rolf Johansson, and Renato Librino. The karyon project: Predictable and safe coordination in cooperative vehicular systems. In 2013 43rd Annual IEEE/IFIP Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks Workshop (DSN-W), pages 1-12, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/DSNW.2013.6615530.
  6. Lei Chen and Cristofer Englund. Cooperative intersection management: A survey. Trans. Intell. Transport. Syst., 17(2):570-586, January 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2015.2471812.
  7. K. Dresner and P. Stone. A multiagent approach to autonomous intersection management. Journal of A.I. Research, 31:591-656, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1613/JAIR.2502.
  8. R. Fagin, J. Y. Halpern, Y. Moses, and M. Y. Vardi. Reasoning About Knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995. A slightly revised paperback version was published in 2003. Google Scholar
  9. N. Fathollahnejad, E. Villani, R. Pathan, R. Barbosa, and J. Karlsson. On reliability analysis of leader election protocols for virtual traffic lights. In 2013 43rd Annual IEEE/IFIP Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks Workshop (DSN-W), pages 1-12, 2013. Google Scholar
  10. M. Ferreira, R. Fernandes, H. Conceição, W. Viriyasitavat, and O. K. Tonguz. Self-organized traffic control. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM International Workshop on VehiculAr InterNETworking, pages 85-90, 2010. Google Scholar
  11. Michael R. Hafner, Drew Cunningham, Lorenzo Caminiti, and Domitilla Del Vecchio. Cooperative collision avoidance at intersections: Algorithms and experiments. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 14(3):1162-1175, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2013.2252901.
  12. Yuh-Jzer Joung. Asynchronous group mutual exclusion. Distributed Computing, 13(4):189-206, November 2000. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00008918.
  13. Leslie Lamport. A new solution of Dijkstra’s concurrent programming problem. Commun. ACM, 17(8):453-455, 1974. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/361082.361093.
  14. Yoram Moses and Katia Patkin. Mutual exclusion as a matter of priority. Theor. Comput. Sci., 751:46-60, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2016.12.015.
  15. E. Regnath, M. Birkner, and S. Steinhorst. CISCAV: consensus-based intersection scheduling for connected autonomous vehicles. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Omni-Layer Intelligent Systems (COINS), pages 1-7, 2021. Google Scholar
  16. V. Savic, E. M. Schiller, and M. Papatriantafilou. Distributed algorithm for collision avoidance at road intersections in the presence of communication failures. In 2017 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), pages 1005-1012, 2017. Google Scholar
  17. Rusheng Zhang, Frank Schmutz, Kyle Gerard, Aurélicn Pomini, Louis Basseto, Sami Ben Hassen, Akihiro Ishikawa, Inci Ozgunes, and Ozan Tonguz. Virtual traffic lights: System design and implementation. In 2018 IEEE 88th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall), pages 1-5, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/VTCFall.2018.8690709.
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact