Vehicle Trajectory Prediction by Knowledge-Driven LSTM Network in Urban Environments
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
An accurate prediction of future trajectories of surrounding vehicles can ensure safe and reasonable interaction between intelligent vehicles and other types of vehicles. Vehicle trajectories are not only constrained by a priori knowledge about road structure, traffic signs, and traffic rules but also affected by posterior knowledge about different driving styles of drivers. The existing prediction models cannot fully combine the prior and posterior knowledge in the driving scene and perform well only in a specific traffic scenario. This paper presents a long short-term memory (LSTM) neural network driven by knowledge. First, a driving knowledge base is constructed to describe the prior knowledge about a driving scenario. Then, the prediction reference baseline (PRB) based on driving knowledge base is determined by using the rule-based online reasoning system. Finally, the future trajectory of the target vehicle is predicted by an LSTM neural network based on the prediction reference baseline, while the predicted trajectory considers both posterior and prior knowledge without increasing the computation complexity. The experimental results show that the proposed trajectory prediction model can adapt to different driving scenarios and predict trajectories with high accuracy due to the unique combination of the prior and posterior knowledge in the driving scene.
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