Application of CNN‐LSTM Model for Vehicle Acceleration Prediction Using Car‐following Behavior Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate vehicle acceleration prediction is useful for developing reliable Advanced Driving Assistance Systems (ADAS) and improving road safety. The existence of driver heterogeneity magnifies the variations in acceleration data, leading to consequential impacts on the precision of vehicle acceleration prediction. However, few studies have fully considered the driver heterogeneity when predicting vehicle acceleration. To model the characteristics of individual drivers, this study first identifies the driving behavior semantics which is defined as the underlying patterns of driving behaviors. The analysis results from the coupled hidden Markov model (CHMM) are used to evaluate the driving behavior differences between different drivers by Wasserstein distance. Then the convolutional neural network (CNN) and long short‐term memory (LSTM) network are applied to predict vehicle acceleration. To validate the accuracy of the proposed prediction framework, vehicle acceleration data in car‐following conditions is extracted from the safety pilot model deployment (SPMD) dataset. The segmentation results indicate that the CHMM possesses a robust capacity for modeling driving behavior. The prediction results demonstrate that the proposed framework, which incorporates driver clustering before prediction, significantly improves the accuracy of predictions. And the CNN‐LSTM outperforms the LSTM in predicting vehicle acceleration during car‐following scenarios. The findings from this study can enhance the development of personalized functionalities within ADAS to promote its deployment, thereby improving its acceptance and safety.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".