MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003080599 · doi:10.4271/2020-01-0759

A Personalized Deep Learning Approach for Trajectory Prediction of Connected Vehicles

2020· article· en· W3003080599 on OpenAlexaff
Yang Xing, Chao Huang, Chen Lv, Yahui Liu, Hong Wang, Dongpu Cao

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceDeep learningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="section abstract"><div class="htmlview paragraph">Forecasting the motion of the leading vehicle is a critical task for connected autonomous vehicles as it provides an efficient way to model the leading-following vehicle behavior and analyze the interactions. In this study, a personalized time-series modeling approach for leading vehicle trajectory prediction considering different driving styles is proposed. The method enables a precise, personalized trajectory prediction for leading vehicles with limited inter-vehicle communication signals, such as vehicle speed, acceleration, space headway, and time headway of the front vehicles. Based on the learning nature of human beings that a human always tries to solve problems based on grouping and similar experience, three different driving styles are first recognized based on an unsupervised clustering with a Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM). The GMM generates a specific driving style for each vehicle based on the speed, acceleration, jerk, time, and space headway features of the leading vehicle. Then, a personalized joint time-series modeling (JTSM) method based on the Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) Recurrent Neural Network model (RNN) is proposed to predict the trajectory of the front vehicle. The JTSM contains a joint LSTM layer and different fully-connected regression layers for different driving styles. The proposed method is tested with the Next Generation Simulation (NGSIM) data on US101, and I-80. The JTSM is tested for making predictions one second ahead. Results indicate that the proposed personalized JTSM approach shows a significant advantage over the other algorithms.</div></div>

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207