MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386767574 · doi:10.1155/2023/6926304

Dynamic Trajectory Planning for Automated Lane Changing Using the Quintic Polynomial Curve

2023· article· en· W4386767574 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yang Li, Linbo Li, Daiheng Ni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Transportation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTrajectoryQuintic functionSequential quadratic programmingPolynomialMathematical optimizationQuadratic functionFunction (biology)AlgorithmComputer scienceTrajectory optimizationQuadratic equationQuadratic programmingDynamic programmingMathematicsControl theory (sociology)Optimal controlArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Advanced TransportationSame topicAutonomous Vehicle Technology and SafetyFrench-language works237,207