arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 2503.01852eess.SYcs.ROcs.SY

面向混合城市交通场景中社会合规自动驾驶的交互感知模型预测决策

Interaction-Aware Model Predictive Decision-Making for Socially-Compliant Autonomous Driving in Mixed Urban Traffic Scenarios

Institute of Control Systems, Karlsruhe Institute for Technology(控制系统研究所,卡尔斯鲁厄技术学院);Wuerzburg Institute for Traffic Sciences GmbH(魏玛交通科学研究所有限公司);Faculty of Engineering - Mechanical Engineering Dept, University of Alberta(工程学院-机械工程系,阿尔伯塔大学)

Balint Varga, Thomas Brand, Marcus Schmitz, Ehsan Hashemi

AI总结:

本文提出交互感知模型预测决策框架,用于提升自动驾驶在混合城市交通场景中的社会合规性与安全性。

摘要:

自动驾驶车辆必须以安全且符合社会规范的方式与行人进行协商。我们提出了一种交互感知的模型预测决策(IAMPDM)框架,该框架整合了受间隙接受启发的意图模型与MPC,以实时联合推断人类意图和车辆控制。行人模块产生一个连续的横穿倾向信号——由时间到碰撞(TTC)驱动,并通过意图折扣机制——该信号调节MPC安全项和最小距离约束。我们在一个基于投影的、具有运动跟踪的模拟器中实现了IAMPDM,并将其与基于规则的意图感知控制器(RBDM)和保守的非交互基线(NIA)进行比较。在一项包含25名参与者的“人为主导决策”研究中,意图感知方法在各种场景中缩短了协商和完成时间,但以更紧的TTC/DST边距为代价,除了一个场景外,IAMPDM与RBDM之间没有显著差异。结果表明,意图感知决策算法相比非合作决策算法减少了行人横穿时间,并提高了主观的舒适性、安全性和信任评分。我们讨论了交互感知自动驾驶车辆在现实世界部署的意义。我们详细说明了决策制定校准和实时实现(CasADi/IPOPT)并提出了部署护栏——最小的替代安全边距、死锁预防——以在效率与安全之间取得平衡。

英文摘要:

Autonomous vehicles must negotiate with pedestrians in ways that are both safe and socially compliant. We present an interaction-aware model predictive decision-making (IAMPDM) framework that integrates a gap-acceptance-inspired intention model with MPC to jointly reason about human intent and vehicle control in real time. The pedestrian module produces a continuous crossing-propensity signal - driven by time-to-collision (TTC) with an intention discounting mechanism - that modulates MPC safety terms and minimum-distance constraints. We implement IAMPDM in a projection-based, motion-tracked simulator and compare it against a rule-based intention-aware controller (RBDM) and a conservative non-interactive baseline (NIA). In a human-in-the-decision-loop study with 25 participants, intention-aware methods shortened negotiation and completion time relative to NIA across scenarios, at the expense of tighter TTC/DST margins, with no significant difference between IAMPDM and RBDM except for TTC in one scenario. Results indicate that intention-aware decision-making algorithms reduce pedestrian crossing time and improve subjective ratings of comfort, safety, and trust relative to a non-cooperative decision-making algorithm. We discuss implications for real-world deployment of interaction-aware autonomous vehicles. We detail decision-making calibration and real-time implementation (CasADi/IPOPT) and propose deployment guardrails - minimum surrogate-safety margins, deadlock prevention - to balance efficiency with safety.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑