Understanding Misconfigurations in ROS: An Empirical Study and Current Approaches

Paulo Canelas,Bradley Schmerl,Alcides Fonseca,Christopher S. Timperley
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3650212.3680350
2024-07-28
Abstract:The Robot Operating System (ROS) is a popular framework and ecosystem that allows developers to build robot software systems from reusable, off-the-shelf components. Systems are often built by customizing and connecting components via configuration files. While reusable components theoretically allow rapid prototyping, ensuring proper configuration and connection is challenging, as evidenced by numerous questions on developer forums. Developers must abide to the often unchecked and unstated assumptions of individual components. Failure to do so can result in misconfigurations that are only discovered during field deployment, at which point errors may lead to unpredictable and dangerous behavior. Despite misconfigurations having been studied in the broader context of software engineering, robotics software (and ROS in particular) poses domain-specific challenges with potentially disastrous consequences. To understand and improve the reliability of ROS projects, it is critical to identify the types of misconfigurations faced by developers. To that end, we perform a study of ROS Answers, a Q&A platform, to identify and categorize misconfigurations that occur during ROS development. We then conduct a literature review to assess the coverage of these misconfigurations by existing detection techniques. In total, we find 12 high-level categories and 50 sub-categories of misconfigurations. Of these categories, 27 are not covered by existing techniques. To conclude, we discuss how to tackle those misconfigurations in future work.
Software Engineering,Robotics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The paper attempts to address the problem of identifying and classifying configuration errors that occur during the development of ROS (Robot Operating System) and evaluating the coverage of existing detection techniques for these configuration errors. Specifically, the authors systematically identified various types of configuration errors encountered by developers when configuring ROS systems by studying questions on ROS Answers. Additionally, they conducted a literature review to assess whether existing detection techniques can cover these configuration errors and explored how to address configuration errors not covered by existing techniques in the future. ### Background of the Paper ROS is a widely used open-source framework for building robotic software systems. It provides a set of reusable components that allow developers to quickly prototype robotic software. However, correctly configuring these components to meet specific application and environmental requirements is a challenge. Configuration errors can lead to unpredictable and even dangerous behavior, especially during field deployment. Therefore, identifying and resolving these configuration errors is crucial for improving the reliability of ROS projects. ### Research Methodology 1. **Data Collection and Filtering**: - Collected 67,189 questions posted on ROS Answers from January 1, 2011, to November 20, 2022. - Reduced the number of questions to 27,547 by filtering out questions with accepted answers. - Further filtered out questions containing ROS and architecture concepts, resulting in 13,740 questions. - Manually screened relevant questions to determine if they described configuration failures. 2. **Open Coding**: - The first author distributed relevant questions to the other three authors for open coding to construct a classification system for configuration errors. - Each author independently proposed an updated code set, then discussed and merged them into a revised classification system. - By analyzing 228 questions, they eventually reached saturation, forming a classification system with 12 high-level categories and 50 subcategories of configuration errors. 3. **Label Annotation**: - Used the final classification system to annotate 228 questions. - Two pairs of authors annotated half of the questions each and calculated the consistency rate. - Discussed and adjusted inconsistent codes to ensure consistency. ### Results The paper identified 12 high-level categories and 50 subcategories of configuration errors through the study and found that 27 of these categories were not covered by existing techniques. These configuration errors include but are not limited to: - **Naming Errors**: For example, mismatched topic names between subscribers and publishers. - **Message Format Errors**: For example, mismatched message formats exchanged on a shared topic between two components. - **Temporal Errors**: For example, frame loss when processing high-resolution image streams, affecting robot behavior. - **Calibration Errors**: For example, improper parameter settings for cameras, PID controllers, and odometers. - **Dependency Errors**: For example, missing necessary dependencies or incorrect dependency versions. - **Physical Unit Errors**: For example, unit conversion errors leading to incorrect calculation results. ### Discussion The authors discussed how to address these configuration errors not covered by existing techniques in future work and proposed new research directions. These research directions include developing new detection tools and techniques, as well as improving existing tools and techniques to better identify and resolve configuration errors in ROS. ### Conclusion Through systematic empirical research, the paper identified common types of configuration errors in ROS development and evaluated the coverage of existing detection techniques. These findings provide a foundation for future research, helping to develop more effective tools and techniques to improve the reliability and safety of ROS projects.