pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.09052 · v1 · pith:VOQCJ3MWnew · submitted 2019-07-21 · 💻 cs.RO · math.OC

Hardware-In-the-Loop for Connected Automated Vehicles Testing in Real Traffic

Yeojun Kim , Samuel Tay , Jacopo Guanetti , Francesco Borrelli , Ryan Miller This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 18:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO math.OC
keywords hardware-in-the-loopconnected automated vehiclesmodel predictive controlenergy efficiencytraffic simulationreal-time testingurban environments
0
0 comments X

The pith

A hardware-in-the-loop setup tests connected automated vehicle control algorithms on actual hardware in simulated real traffic.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents a hardware-in-the-loop simulation setup that combines PreScan for sensors and intersections, Vissim for traffic, ETAS tools for vehicle dynamics, and on-board ECUs to test CAV algorithms. Models of traffic and intersections are driven by real-world measurements to support repeatable tests in dynamic conditions. The setup is demonstrated by applying model predictive control to maximize energy efficiency for CAVs in urban environments. A sympathetic reader would care because it offers a controlled way to validate planning and control on real vehicle hardware before full road deployment.

Core claim

We present a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation setup for repeatable testing of Connected Automated Vehicles (CAVs) in dynamic, real-world scenarios. Our goal is to test control and planning algorithms and their distributed implementation on the vehicle hardware and, possibly, in the cloud. The HIL setup combines PreScan for perception sensors, road topography, and signalized intersections; Vissim for traffic micro-simulation; ETAS DESK-LABCAR/a dynamometer for vehicle and powertrain dynamics; and on-board electronic control units for CAV real time control. Models of traffic and signalized intersections are driven by real-world measurements. To demonstrate this HIL simulation setup, we测试a

What carries the argument

The hardware-in-the-loop simulation setup that integrates PreScan, Vissim, ETAS DESK-LABCAR with dynamometer, and on-board ECUs, with traffic and intersection models driven by real-world measurements.

If this is right

  • Control and planning algorithms can be tested and their distributed implementation validated on actual vehicle hardware and possibly in the cloud.
  • Repeatable testing becomes possible in dynamic real-world scenarios using measured traffic and intersection data.
  • Model predictive control for energy efficiency of CAVs in urban environments can be evaluated in real time on hardware.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The setup could reduce reliance on costly and risky on-road tests by allowing more controlled repetitions of varied traffic conditions.
  • Similar HIL combinations might be adapted for testing other CAV functions such as safety or coordination with infrastructure.
  • Extending the cloud component could enable testing of distributed algorithms across multiple simulated vehicles.

Load-bearing premise

Models of traffic and signalized intersections driven by real-world measurements, combined with the listed simulation tools, enable accurate and repeatable testing of control algorithms in real time.

What would settle it

A side-by-side comparison where the same CAV control algorithm run on the actual vehicle in the modeled real traffic produces energy use or behavior that differs substantially from the HIL results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.09052 by Francesco Borrelli, Jacopo Guanetti, Ryan Miller, Samuel Tay, Yeojun Kim.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Simplified HIL hardware setup schematic 2.2 HIL Software Setup High fidelity environment and/or vehicle simulators are em￾ployed to represent various complex real world scenarios and test vehicle dynamics [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: HIL software setup schematic running in the desktop computer while other parts are operating on their own designated hardware from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Route in urban road in Arcadia [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: HIL simulation for catch-up of a vehicle traveling [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: HIL simulation for a vehicle running through a seri [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_7.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation setup for repeatable testing of Connected Automated Vehicles (CAVs) in dynamic, real-world scenarios. Our goal is to test control and planning algorithms and their distributed implementation on the vehicle hardware and, possibly, in the cloud. The HIL setup combines PreScan for perception sensors, road topography, and signalized intersections; Vissim for traffic micro-simulation; ETAS DESK-LABCAR/a dynamometer for vehicle and powertrain dynamics; and on-board electronic control units for CAV real time control. Models of traffic and signalized intersections are driven by real-world measurements. To demonstrate this HIL simulation setup, we test a Model Predictive Control approach for maximizing energy efficiency of CAVs in urban environments.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation setup for repeatable testing of Connected Automated Vehicles (CAVs) in dynamic real-world scenarios. It integrates PreScan for perception sensors, road topography and signalized intersections; Vissim for traffic micro-simulation; ETAS DESK-LABCAR/dynamometer for vehicle and powertrain dynamics; and on-board ECUs for real-time control. Traffic and intersection models are driven by real-world measurements. The setup is demonstrated by testing a Model Predictive Control (MPC) approach for energy-efficiency maximization of CAVs in urban environments.

Significance. If the integration functions as described, the work offers a practical architecture for safe, repeatable testing of CAV planning and control algorithms that combines sensor simulation, traffic micro-simulation, and hardware-in-the-loop vehicle dynamics. This addresses a recognized need in the CAV community for hybrid testing environments that reduce reliance on full-scale field trials while incorporating measured traffic data.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and demonstration description: the central claim that the HIL setup enables 'accurate and repeatable testing' of control algorithms rests on the assertion that real-world-driven models of traffic and intersections, combined with the listed tools, produce faithful real-time behavior. No quantitative validation (e.g., comparison of simulated vs. measured trajectories, timing errors, or energy-consumption discrepancies) is supplied to support this assertion.
minor comments (2)
  1. The manuscript would benefit from explicit discussion of real-time synchronization challenges between PreScan, Vissim, and the ETAS platform, including any latency measurements or buffering strategies.
  2. Clarify whether the MPC demonstration reports any closed-loop performance metrics (fuel savings, travel time, constraint violations) or merely describes the controller being placed in the loop.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. We address the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and demonstration description: the central claim that the HIL setup enables 'accurate and repeatable testing' of control algorithms rests on the assertion that real-world-driven models of traffic and intersections, combined with the listed tools, produce faithful real-time behavior. No quantitative validation (e.g., comparison of simulated vs. measured trajectories, timing errors, or energy-consumption discrepancies) is supplied to support this assertion.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript does not supply quantitative validation (e.g., trajectory or energy-consumption comparisons) of the integrated models against real-world measurements. The demonstration centers on the integration architecture and its use with the MPC controller rather than on end-to-end fidelity metrics. Repeatability follows from the deterministic simulation loop; realism is pursued by driving traffic and intersection models with measured data. In revision we will adjust the abstract and introduction to remove any implication of validated accuracy and instead describe the platform as enabling repeatable testing within a hybrid environment that incorporates real-world traffic measurements. We will also add a short paragraph noting the documented validation status of the constituent tools. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper is a purely descriptive account of a hardware-in-the-loop testbed architecture that integrates PreScan, Vissim, ETAS DESK-LABCAR/dynamometer, and vehicle ECUs, with traffic and intersection models populated from real-world measurements. No equations, parameter fitting, predictive claims, or derivation chain exist in the manuscript; the contribution is the integration description itself. Consequently the text contains none of the enumerated circularity patterns and is self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5666 in / 1109 out tokens · 24454 ms · 2026-05-24T18:19:30.825623+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Control of connect ed and automated vehicles: State of the art and future chal- lenges

    J. Guanetti, Y . Kim, and F. Borrelli, “Control of connect ed and automated vehicles: State of the art and future chal- lenges”, Annual Reviews in Control , vol. 45C, pp. 18–40, 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    On hardware-in-the-loop simulation

    M. Bacic, “On hardware-in-the-loop simulation”, in Deci- sion and Control, 2005 and 2005 European Control Con- ference. CDC-ECC’05. 44th IEEE Conference on , IEEE, 2005, pp. 3194–3198

    work page 2005

  3. [3]

    Re- view of hardware-in-the-loop simulation and its prospects in the automotive area

    H. K. Fathy, Z. S. Filipi, J. Hagena, and J. L. Stein, “Re- view of hardware-in-the-loop simulation and its prospects in the automotive area”, in Modeling and simulation for military applications, International Society for Optics and Photonics, vol. 6228, 2006, 62280E

    work page 2006

  4. [4]

    Hardware-in- the-loop simulation for the design and testing of engine- control systems

    R. Isermann, J. Schaffnit, and S. Sinsel, “Hardware-in- the-loop simulation for the design and testing of engine- control systems”, Control Engineering Practice , vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 643–653, 1999

    work page 1999

  5. [5]

    A sliding mode con- trol of a full-car electrorheological suspension system vi a hardware in-the-loop simulation

    S. Choi, Y . T. Choi, and D. Park, “A sliding mode con- trol of a full-car electrorheological suspension system vi a hardware in-the-loop simulation”, Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control , vol. 122, no. 1, pp. 114–121, 2000

    work page 2000

  6. [6]

    Enabling pc-based hil simulation for automotive applications

    P . Baracos, G. Murere, C. Rabbath, and W . Jin, “Enabling pc-based hil simulation for automotive applications”, in Electric Machines and Drives Conference, 2001. IEMDC

    work page 2001

  7. [7]

    IEEE International , IEEE, 2001, pp. 721–729

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    A novel cooperative adaptive cruise control approach: The- ory and hardware in the loop experimental validation

    U. Montanaro, M. Tufo, G. Fiengo, and S. Santini, “A novel cooperative adaptive cruise control approach: The- ory and hardware in the loop experimental validation”, in Control and Automation (MED), 2014 22nd Mediter- ranean Conference of, IEEE, 2014, pp. 37–42

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    Development of a distributed hardware-in-the-loop simulation system for transportation networks

    R. Engelbrecht, C. Poe, and K. Balke, “Development of a distributed hardware-in-the-loop simulation system for transportation networks”, in 78th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, W ashington, DC, 1999

    work page 1999

  10. [10]

    Hardware and software considerations for imple- menting hardware-in-the loop traffic simulation

    R. B. Wells, J. Fisher, Y . Zhou, B. K. Johnson, and M. Kyte, “Hardware and software considerations for imple- menting hardware-in-the loop traffic simulation”, in In- dustrial Electronics Society, 2001. IECON’01. The 27th Annual Conference of the IEEE , IEEE, vol. 3, 2001, pp. 1915–1919

    work page 2001

  11. [11]

    A simulation tool suite for developing connected vehicle systems

    M. Tideman and M. van Noort, “A simulation tool suite for developing connected vehicle systems”, in Intelli- gent V ehicles Symposium (IV), 2013 IEEE , IEEE, 2013, pp. 713–718

    work page 2013

  12. [12]

    Hardware in the loop simulation of embedded automotive control system

    M. Short and M. J. Pont, “Hardware in the loop simulation of embedded automotive control system”, in Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2005. Proceedings. 2005 IEEE , IEEE, 2005, pp. 426–431

    work page 2005

  13. [13]

    Hybrid control for cooperative vehicle-platoon via the hardware-in-the- loop simulator

    Y . Ma, Y . Xu, Q. Wu, and R. Zhang, “Hybrid control for cooperative vehicle-platoon via the hardware-in-the- loop simulator”, in Intelligent Transportation Systems- (ITSC), 2013 16th International IEEE Conference on , IEEE, 2013, pp. 2373–2378

    work page 2013

  14. [14]

    Development of advanced driver assistance systems with vehicle hardware-in-the-loop simulations

    O. Gietelink, J. Ploeg, B. De Schutter, and M. V erhae- gen, “Development of advanced driver assistance systems with vehicle hardware-in-the-loop simulations”, V ehicle System Dynamics, vol. 44, no. 7, pp. 569–590, 2006

    work page 2006

  15. [15]

    Pre-crash system validation with prescan and vehil

    O. Gietelink, D. V erburg, K. Labibes, and A. Oostendorp , “Pre-crash system validation with prescan and vehil”, in Intelligent V ehicles Symposium, 2004 IEEE, IEEE, 2004, pp. 913–918

    work page 2004

  16. [16]

    Prescan, ver:8.1.0 [computer software] , https://tass.plm.automation.siemens.com/prescan

    work page

  17. [17]

    Vissim, ver:08 [computer software], (2015) , http://vision-traffic.ptvgroup.com/en-us/products/p tv-vissim

    work page 2015

  18. [18]

    A model predictive controller for non-cooperative eco-platooning

    V . Turri, Y . Kim, J. Guanetti, K. H. Johansson, and F. Bor - relli, “A model predictive controller for non-cooperative eco-platooning”, in American Control Conference (ACC), 2017, IEEE, 2017, pp. 2309–2314

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    [Online]

    Sensis Networks . [Online]. Available: http://www.sensysnetworks.com/

    work page

  20. [20]

    H/sub/spl infin//, adaptive, pid and fuzzy control: A comparison of con- trollers for vehicle lane keeping

    S. Chaib, M. S. Netto, and S. Mammar, “H/sub/spl infin//, adaptive, pid and fuzzy control: A comparison of con- trollers for vehicle lane keeping”, in Intelligent V ehicles Symposium, 2004 IEEE , IEEE, 2004, pp. 139–144

    work page 2004