[Proposal] Add new field "requested" in RTC msg

[go-sakayori]

Motivation

The current RTC (Request to Cooperate) message lacks a field that indicates whether Autoware is requesting cooperation outside the system. As a result, it has been challenging to implement actions that seek assistance from other systems in situations where it is difficult to make decisions within Autoware. This issue becomes particularly pronounced when the RTC execution mode is set to auto. For example, in cases where it is difficult to determine whether a vehicle ahead is parked/unparked, the current implementation only has two options: stopping or taking avoidance action. There is no mechanism in place to carry out obstacle avoidance based on the operator's judgment, and this will limit functions such as remote cooperative autonomous driving.

Proposed Approach

To further extend the RTC interface, we propose adding a new field bool requested.
The CooperateStatus.msg inside tier4_autoware_msgs\tier4_rtc_msgs would be changed as below:

builtin_interfaces/Time stamp

# Request unique id
unique_identifier_msgs/UUID uuid

# Indicate module type which makes this cooperate request.
tier4_rtc_msgs/Module module

# Indicate whether the system judges it's safe condition to execute or not.
bool safe

+ #Indicate whether there is request to cooperate from the system 
+ bool requested


# Indicate RTC approval status
tier4_rtc_msgs/Command command_status

# Current execution state
tier4_rtc_msgs/State state

# RTC execution mode
# TRUE: Auto mode (it can execute without human operator's approval.)
# FALSE: Manual mode (it needs human operator's approval to execute.)
bool auto_mode

# Section which will be modified when this cooperate request is approved.
float32 start_distance
float32 finish_distance

Discussion

Please let me know if you have any concerns or suggestions regarding this proposal, thanks!
@mitsudome-r @yukkysaito

[yukkysaito]

Currently, there is no field in CooperateStatus to explicitly send a request for assistance to the operator. The operator monitors the safe/unsafe status in CooperateStatus and interprets the request for assistance based on their judgment. For example, if the status is safe, the operator’s tool independently interprets it as "Autoware can execute safely, but can you approve it?"

I agree with the current proposal. By explicitly indicating whether Autoware is currently requesting assistance, we can prevent the operator's tool from making independent interpretations. Additionally, this allows for more sophisticated requests for assistance by utilizing detailed information within Autoware.

However, it should be noted that this is not the final form of the RTC interface. Therefore, I believe we should temporarily introduce the above interface and continue discussions on what the final interface should be.

[mitsudome-r]

@go-sakayori Thanks for the proposal. As @yukkysaito said, tier4_autoware_msgs is a messages defined by TIER IV and are not official Autoware interface. We can make the change according to the proposal, but we should revisit the design when we move it to autoware_msgs repository.