MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402187256 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2024.3454574

Hierarchical Transformers for Motion Forecasting Based on Inverse Reinforcement Learning

2024· article· en· W4402187256 on OpenAlexafffund
Mozhgan Nasr Azadani, Azzedine Boukerche

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsReinforcement learningTransformerArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceEngineeringMachine learningElectrical engineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding and forecasting the future states of surrounding agents is crucial for ensuring safe and human-like decision-making for autonomous vehicles, which plays a pivotal role in the future of intelligent transportation systems. While data-driven methodologies, including recent advancements such as transformers and graph neural networks, have made significant progress, managing multimodality, achieving scene conformability, and providing human-like decision-making in future steps of the autonomy stack remains challenging. Unlike existing data-driven motion forecasting approaches that do not explicitly consider human-like motion planning, this work proposes learning from human (expert) behavior based on Inverse Reinforcement Learning (IRL). We design a novel Hierarchical Transformer-based Motion Forecasting framework, called HTMF, that learns the multimodal future motion distribution using maximum entropy IRL and leverages transformer-based learned occupancy grid maps as a context-aware approximation to the true distribution, enabling the generation of realistic motions. To assess the performance of the proposed approach, we conduct comprehensive experiments on large-scale real-world datasets across diverse challenging scenarios such as highways and unsignalized intersections. The results demonstrate that HTMF outperforms other benchmark motion forecasting methods in terms of prediction errors and in generating more plausible and human-like trajectories.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207