fix(static_obstacle_avoidance): fix issues in target object filtering logic

[satoshi-ota]

Description

improve logic to judge if the vehicle is in intersection e27f497

Originally, this module checks whether the object polygon is perfectly in intersection polygon. But somtimes it caused wrong judgement due to the perception performance or noise. In this PR, I changed the logic to use object position point instead of its polygon for boost::geometry::within function.

BEFORE

AFTER

---

support edge case where the current lane is terminated 5da4c47

This moule checks whether the object is on ego lane by using route_handler->getNextLaneletWithinRoute. But the lane where the bus is on is NOT included in route lanelet in following fig.

Then, I added following process to handle this situation.

  if (route_handler->getNextLaneletWithinRoute(object.overhang_lanelet, &next_lanelet)) {
  ...
  } else {
    for (const auto & lane : route_handler->getNextLanelets(object.overhang_lanelet)) {
      if (boost::geometry::within(
            lanelet::utils::to2D(lanelet::utils::conversion::toLaneletPoint(object.getPosition()))
              .basicPoint(),
            lane.polygon2d().basicPolygon())) {
        return true;
      }
    }
  }

BEFORE

AFTER

---

fix parked vehicle judgement b6ca523

Previously, this module couldn't filter parked vehicle properly because it didn't use most right/left lane to calculate shiftable ratio when there were opposite lanes.

BEFORE

In this case, the bus is judged as parked vehicle even though it's on middle lane.

AFTER

After this PR, the bus is judged non-parked vehicle.

Related links

Parent Issue:

• TIER IV INTERNAL LINK related to e27f497
• TIER IV INTERNAL LINK related to 5da4c47

How was this PR tested?

• PASS TIER IV INTERNAL SCENARIOS

Notes for reviewers

None.

Interface changes

None.

Effects on system behavior

None.

[github-actions]

Thank you for contributing to the Autoware project!

🚧 If your pull request is in progress, switch it to draft mode.

Please ensure:

• You've checked our contribution guidelines.
• Your PR follows our pull request guidelines.
• All required CI checks pass before marking the PR ready for review.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 41 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 28.67%. Comparing base (7238701) to head (b6ca523).
Report is 13 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...ath_static_obstacle_avoidance_module/src/utils.cpp	0.00%	30 Missing ⚠️
...acle_avoidance_module/src/shift_line_generator.cpp	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️
...ath_static_obstacle_avoidance_module/src/debug.cpp	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
..._static_obstacle_avoidance_module/data_structs.hpp	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #7830      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   28.67%   28.67%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        1587     1588       +1     
  Lines      116303   116319      +16     
  Branches    49662    49673      +11     
==========================================
+ Hits        33355    33359       +4     
- Misses      73904    73917      +13     
+ Partials     9044     9043       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ		*Carryforward flag
differential	13.65% <0.00%> (?)
total	28.69% <ø> (+0.01%)	⬆️	Carriedforward from 7238701

*This pull request uses carry forward flags. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.