[FIX] can_bus input of quaternion mistakenly get all 4 number as same number #214
+1
−1
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Issue
A subtle bug was discovered in the NuScenes dataset loader where the canbus input for the BEV head incorrectly assigns quaternion values for ego vehicle rotation. Specifically, when assigning the quaternion (positions 4-8), all components receive the same value as rotation.w.
Reproduction Example
Fix
The solution is to use the quaternion's underlying numpy array for assignment:
Why the Bug Remained Undetected
Two main factors contributed to the delayed discovery:
This allowed the model to still function in open-loop evaluation scenarios where the same dataloader was used.
Discovery Process
We tried to integrate the UniAD model into our simulation pipeline but faced an issue: no matter how we supplied the rotation data from the simulator, the model couldn't generate the correct turning trajectory. To troubleshoot, we inspected the training pipeline line by line and discovered the problem. We confirmed that the UniAD model behaves correctly only when we input 'w, w, w, w' as the rotation in the canbus during simulation.
Impact
We conclude that this issue will not affact the open-loop evaluation. But if people try to use the model in the close-loop environments, like simualtion or real vehicle, it will show up.
We traced the source of this issue, and it's first appearance is well-adopted BEVFormer code base. And this issue still existed there. Which means all work derived from BEVFormer share the same problem.
Required Actions