Human Navigational Intent Inference with Probabilistic and Optimal Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although human navigational intent inference has been studied in the literature, none have adequately considered both the dynamics that describe human motion and internal human parameters that may affect human navigational behaviour. In this paper, we propose a general probabilistic framework to infer the probability distribution over future navigational states of a human. Our framework incorporates an extended Dubins car dynamics to model human movement, which captures differences in human navigational behaviour depending on their position, heading, and movement speed. We assume a noisily rational model of human behaviour that incorporates a) human navigational intent that may change over time, b) how optimal a person's actions are given the navigational intent, and c) how far ahead in time a person considers when choosing navigational actions. These parameters are recursively and continuously updated in a Bayesian fashion. To make the Bayesian update and inference tractable, we exploit properties of the time-to-reach value function from optimal control and the extended Dubins car dynamics to construct a utility function on which the human policy is based, and employ particle representations of probability distributions where necessary. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our method by comparing our results with a recent approach using synthetic data and validate it on real world data.
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".