FJMP: Factorized Joint Multi-Agent Motion Prediction over Learned Directed Acyclic Interaction Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predicting the future motion of road agents is a critical task in an autonomous driving pipeline. In this work, we address the problem of generating a set of scene-level, or joint, future trajectory predictions in multi-agent driving scenarios. To this end, we propose FJMP, a Factorized Joint Motion Prediction framework for multi-agent interactive driving scenarios. FJMP models the future scene interaction dynamics as a sparse directed interaction graph, where edges denote explicit interactions between agents. We then prune the graph into a directed acyclic graph (DAG) and decompose the joint prediction task into a sequence of marginal and conditional predictions according to the partial ordering of the DAG, where joint future trajectories are decoded using a directed acyclic graph neural network (DAGNN). We conduct experiments on the INTERACTION and Argoverse 2 datasets and demonstrate that FJMP produces more accurate and scene-consistent joint trajectory predictions than non-factorized approaches, especially on the most interactive and kinematically interesting agents. FJMP ranks 1st on the multi-agent test leaderboard of the INTERACTION dataset.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".