Dynamic Trajectory Planning for Automated Lane Changing Using the Quintic Polynomial Curve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As one of the key algorithms in supporting AV (autonomous vehicle) to complete the LC (lane changing) maneuver, the LTP (LC trajectory planning) algorithm generates safe and efficient LC trajectory for the AV. This paper proposes a novel dynamic LTP algorithm based on the quintic polynomial curve. This algorithm is capable of adjusting LC trajectory according to the state changes of the surrounding driving environment. The formulation of our proposed algorithm mainly consists the underlying form of trajectory equation, the optimization objective function, the corresponding constrains, and the SQP (sequential quadratic programming) algorithm. For each planning step, the time-based quintic polynomial function is introduced to model the trajectory equation. The problem of solving the parameters of the corresponding equation is then transformed into an optimization problem, which takes driver’s safety, comfort, and efficiency into account. After that, the SQP algorithm is employed to solve this optimization problem. Finally, both numerical simulation and field-data validation are used to verify the effectiveness of our proposed algorithm. We anticipate that the research could provide certain valuable insights for developing more reliable LC algorithms for AVs.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".