MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285045354 · doi:10.20517/ir.2022.11

AVDDPG – Federated reinforcement learning applied to autonomous platoon control

2022· article· en· W4285045354 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Christian Boin, Lei Lei, Simon X. Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIntelligence & Robotics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTraffic control and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPlatoonReinforcement learningReinforcementComputer scienceMaterials scienceControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2016 federated learning (FL) has been an evolving topic of discussion in the artificial intelligence (AI) research community. Applications of FL led to the development and study of federated reinforcement learning (FRL). Few works exist on the topic of FRL applied to autonomous vehicle (AV) platoons. In addition, most FRL works choose a single aggregation method (usually weight or gradient aggregation). We explore FRL's effectiveness as a means to improve AV platooning by designing and implementing an FRL framework atop a custom AV platoon environment. The application of FRL in AV platooning is studied under two scenarios: (1) Inter-platoon FRL (Inter-FRL) where FRL is applied to AVs across different platoons; (2) Intra-platoon FRL (Intra-FRL) where FRL is applied to AVs within a single platoon. Both Inter-FRL and Intra-FRL are applied to a custom AV platooning environment using both gradient and weight aggregation to observe the performance effects FRL can have on AV platoons relative to an AV platooning environment trained without FRL. It is concluded that Intra-FRL using weight aggregation (Intra-FRLWA) provides the best performance for controlling an AV platoon. In addition, we found that weight aggregation in FRL for AV platooning provides increases in performance relative to gradient aggregation. Finally, a performance analysis is conducted for Intra-FRLWA versus a platooning environment without FRL for platoons of length 3, 4 and 5 vehicles. It is concluded that Intra-FRLWA largely out-performs the platooning environment that is trained without FRL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntelligence & RoboticsSame topicTraffic control and managementFrench-language works237,207