MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2474392009 · doi:10.1155/2017/3080859

A Framework for Estimating Long Term Driver Behavior

2017· article· en· W2474392009 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Electrical, Communications and Cyber SystemsNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTerm (time)TrajectoryState (computer science)Markov chainHidden Markov modelAdvanced driver assistance systemsEstimationHybrid system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a framework for estimation of long term driver behavior for autonomous vehicles and vehicle safety systems. The Hybrid State System and Hidden Markov Model (HSS+HMM) system discussed in this article is capable of describing the hybrid characteristics of driver and vehicle coupling. In our model, driving observations follow a continuous trajectory that can be measured to create continuous state estimates. These continuous state estimates can then be used to estimate the most likely driver state using decision-behavior coupling inherent to the HSS+HMM system. The HSS+HMM system is encompassed in a HSS structure and intersystem connectivity is determined by using signal processing and pattern recognition techniques. The proposed method is suitable for a number of autonomous and vehicle safety scenarios such as estimating intent of other vehicles near intersections or avoiding hazardous driving events such as unexpected lane changes. The long term driver behavior estimation system involves an extended HSS+HMM structure that is capable of including external information in the estimation process. Through the grafting and pruning of metastates, the HSS+HMM system can be dynamically updated to best represent driver choices given external information. Three application examples are also provided to elucidate the theoretical system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207