A Novel Model for Driver Lane Change Prediction in Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate lane change prediction can reduce potential accidents and contribute to higher road safety. Adaptive cruise control (ACC), lane departure avoidance (LDA), and lane keeping assistance (LKA) are some conventional modules in advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). Thanks to vehicle-to-vehicle communication (V2V), vehicles can share traffic information with surrounding vehicles, enabling cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC). While ACC relies on the vehicle’s sensors to obtain the position and velocity of the leading vehicle, CACC also has access to the acceleration of multiple vehicles through V2V communication. This paper compares the type of information (position, velocity, acceleration) and the number of surrounding vehicles for driver lane change prediction. We trained an LSTM (Long Short-Term Memory) on the HighD dataset to predict lane change intention. Results indicate a significant improvement in accuracy with an increase in the number of surrounding vehicles and the information received from them. Specifically, the proposed model can predict the ego vehicle lane change with 59.15% and 92.43% accuracy in ACC and CACC scenarios, respectively.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".