A Personalized Behavior Learning System for Human-Like Longitudinal Speed Control of Autonomous Vehicles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the main component of an autonomous driving system, the motion planner plays an essential role for safe and efficient driving. However, traditional motion planners cannot make full use of the on-board sensing information and lack the ability to efficiently adapt to different driving scenes and behaviors of different drivers. To overcome this limitation, a personalized behavior learning system (PBLS) is proposed in this paper to improve the performance of the traditional motion planner. This system is based on the neural reinforcement learning (NRL) technique, which can learn from human drivers online based on the on-board sensing information and realize human-like longitudinal speed control (LSC) through the learning from demonstration (LFD) paradigm. Under the LFD framework, the desired speed of human drivers can be learned by PBLS and converted to the low-level control commands by a proportion integration differentiation (PID) controller. Experiments using driving simulator and real driving data show that PBLS can adapt to different drivers by reproducing their driving behaviors for LSC in different scenes. Moreover, through a comparative experiment with the traditional adaptive cruise control (ACC) system, the proposed PBLS demonstrates a superior performance in maintaining driving comfort and smoothness.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it