Learning to Drive in the NGSIM Simulator Using Proximal Policy Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a popular research field, autonomous driving may offer great benefits for human society. To achieve that, current studies often applied machine learning methods like reinforcement learning to enable an agent to interact and learn in a stimulating environment. However, most simulators lack realistic traffic which may cause a deficiency in realistic interaction. The present study adopted the SMARTS platform to create a simulator in which the trajectories of the vehicles in the NGSIM I-80 dataset were extracted as the background traffic. The built NGSIM simulator was used to train a model using the proximal policy optimization method. The actor-critic neural network was applied, and the model takes inputs including 38 features that encode the information of the host vehicle and the nearest surrounding vehicles in the current lane and adjacent lane. A2C was selected as a comparative method. The results revealed that the PPO model outperformed the A2C model in the current task by collecting more rewards, traveling longer distances, and encountering less dangerous events during model training and testing. The PPO model achieved an 84% success rate in the test which is comparable to the related studies. The present study proved that the public driving dataset and reinforcement learning can provide a useful tool to achieve autonomous driving.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".