A Decision-Making Model for Self-Driving Vehicles Based on Overtaking Frequency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The driving state of a self-driving vehicle represents an important component in the self-driving decision system. To ensure the safe and efficient driving state of a self-driving vehicle, the driving state of the self-driving vehicle needs to be evaluated quantitatively. In this paper, a driving state assessment method for the decision system of self-driving vehicles is proposed. First, a self-driving vehicle and surrounding vehicles are compared in terms of the overtaking frequency (OTF), and an OTF-based driving state evaluation algorithm is proposed considering the future driving efficiency. Next, a decision model based on the deep deterministic policy gradient (DDPG) algorithm and the proposed method is designed, and the driving state assessment method is integrated with the existing time-to-collision (TTC) and minimum safe distance. In addition, the reward function and multiple driving scenarios are designed so that the most efficient driving strategy at the current moment can be determined by optimal search under the condition of ensuring safety. Finally, the proposed decision model is verified by simulations in four three-lane highway scenarios. The simulation results show that the proposed decision model that integrates the self-driving vehicle driving state assessment method can help self-driving vehicles to drive safely and to maintain good maneuverability.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".