EditFollower: Tunable Car Following Models for Customizable Adaptive Cruise Control Systems

Since the first car-following model, the Pipes model, was proposed in 1953 [19], researchers have devoted over seven decades to studying car-following models. Five main categories of traditional car-following models have been identified: stimulus-response models, safe distance models, psycho-physiological models, optimal velocity models, and desired goal models [20, 21, 5].

Stimulus-response models rely solely on relative information (distance or speed) to predict FV acceleration. Built upon the principle of direct response to speed difference, the Gazis-Herman-Rothery (GHR) model [22] assumes a vehicle’s acceleration as directly proportional to the speed difference between itself and the lead vehicle, neatly capturing its basic acceleration/deceleration dynamics.

Different from stimulus-response models, Kometani $et$ $al.$ [23] introduced the safety distance model, acknowledging the inherent unpredictability of lead vehicles. This ”conflict avoidance” model prioritizes maintaining a minimum safe distance from the lead vehicle, setting a new standard for car-following behavior.

The psycho-physiological model, built on Michaels’ work [24], supposes that drivers react primarily to changes in relative LV-FV motion. VISSIM${}^{{\textsuperscript{\textregistered}}}$, a microscopic traffic simulator, leverages this concept through the Wiedemann model [2].

While the Optimal Velocity Model (OVM) of Bando $et$ $al.$ [25] effectively explains diverse traffic flow phenomena, its potential for unrealistic acceleration/deceleration prompted the development of the Generalized Force Model (GFM) by Helbing $et$ $al.$ [26]. This model augments the OVM by incorporating the influence of negative speed differences, leading to more realistic driving behaviors.

Driver-centric desired goal models, assuming specific goals like desired speed and headway, have become popularized by models like the Intelligent Driver Model (IDM) [1]. This stands out as the most widely used traditional car-following model which offers a simpler and more effective approach to modeling driver behavior.

However, it is important to note that these rule-based models generally focus on factors such as relative distance, speed difference, and safety distance, they do not explicitly incorporate the concept of courtesy into their frameworks. Courtesy, which refers to the willingness of drivers to accommodate and show consideration for others, plays a crucial role in shaping driver behavior and overall traffic flow.

In the field of car-following models, there are two main categories: traditional models and data-driven models. Data-driven car-following models transcend traditional rule-based approaches by embracing the power of Artificial Intelligence. From nonparametric regression’s flexibility to the intricate learning capabilities of neural networks and reinforcement learning, these models are trained from rich datasets, unraveling the intricate tapestry of factors influencing driver behavior.

For example, in 2015, a simple k-nearest neighbor-based nonparametric car-following model was introduced to predict driving behavior [27]. Another nonparametric data-driven model is the Loess model, which relies on locally weighted regression [28].

A 4-layer neural network structure with two hidden layers, as adopted by Hongfei $et$ $al.$ [29], demonstrates the effectiveness of neural network-based approaches in capturing the complex relationships between gap distance, relative velocity, desired velocity, and FV speed. Reactive agent-based models employing ANNs, such as backpropagation and fuzzy ARTMAP [30], have emerged as promising approaches in car-following research due to their ability to learn complex traffic dynamics and adapt to diverse driving scenarios. Additionally, research has demonstrated the effectiveness of recurrent neural networks, including Vanilla RNN, Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), and Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU), in modeling car-following behavior [31, 32, 33]. Also, Mo $et$ $al.$ [34] introduced the Physical Information Deep Learning Car-Following (PIDL-CF) model. This approach integrates traditional car-following models with neural networks to predict acceleration under different traffic conditions.

In the realm of reinforcement learning (RL), several frameworks based on deep deterministic policy gradient (DDPG) have been developed to model car-following behavior, aiming to replicate human-like behavior while optimizing driving performance [35, 36, 37]. Furthermore, personalized car-following models have emerged using inverse reinforcement learning (IRL) [38] or hybrid approaches combining RL and supervised learning [39], allowing for individual driver behavior modeling.

Recently, attention has been drawn to the potential of using Transformer-based models for long-sequence car-following trajectory prediction [40, 41]. These approaches excel at capturing complex temporal relationships within driving data. Despite their ability to learn reactive driving from vast datasets, deep learning methods remain tethered to the distribution of training data. This limits their capacity to modify agent courtesy beyond the spectrum observed in the training data.

Extensive research has been conducted on the development of Adaptive Cruise Control systems that mimic human driving behavior, followed by a substantial body of work in the field of controllable driving behavior. Zhu $et$ $al.$ [42] introduced a data-driven approach to create a Personalized Adaptive Cruise Control system capable (PACC) of adapting to different driving styles. This method involves gathering real-world driving data, categorizing drivers based on their unique characteristics, and then constructing a personalized PACC architecture. Similarly, Lu $et$ $al.$ [43] proposed a personalized behavior learning system (PBLS) using neural reinforcement learning. By mimicking the nuanced adjustments of experienced drivers, the PBLS transcends the limitations of conventional motion planners, unlocking a new era of human-centric longitudinal control in diverse driving scenarios. In addition, Wei $et$ $al.$ [44] used simulator data to fine-tune a car-following model that imitates human driving behavior and developed a Model Predictive Control controller. This controller allows autonomous vehicles to smoothly follow natural trajectories in various situations. However, accurately replicating the entire spectrum of human driving behaviors presents a significant challenge with these methods due to their reliance on large-scale real-world driving data.

Achieving a thorough emulation of human driving behavior entails capturing not only the diverse range of driving styles and scenarios but also detecting the nuanced decision-making processes and situational awareness that human drivers possess. Therefore, it is important to enhance the adaptability and responsiveness of these systems across a wider range of driving conditions and individual driving preferences. Chang $et$ $al.$ [17] proposed an innovative strategy called Socially-Controllable Behavior Generation (SCBG). This strategy introduces a new parameter, namely the courtesy level $\psi$, to specifically address how courteously Vehicle B behaves towards Vehicle A in a simulated interactive traffic scenario. The SCBG model proved its mettle on the Waymo Open Motion Dataset. Not only did it generate realistic driving behaviors with adjustable courtesy levels, but it also demonstrated the remarkable ability to adapt courteous actions to the specific demands of each scenario. Therefore, the concept of courtesy level is applied to generate various car-following behaviors in our research, modeling the diverse following behaviors arising from different driver profiles, from aggressive tailgating to cautious distance-keeping, specifically for simulation agents under different levels of aggressiveness.

We define the problem by outlining the input features and output variables of the model. The five dimensions of the input feature are the speed of LV ($v_{t}^{LV}$), the speed of FV ($v_{t}^{FV}$), the relative spacing ($\Delta d_{t}$), the relative speed ($\Delta v_{t}$), and FV’s discourtesy level (denoted as $\psi$). The model’s output is the speed of FV in the next time step. The composition of the input features and output variables is listed below.

where $\hat{y_{t}}$ represents the speed prediction of FV at the next time step.

To capture diverse driving behaviors, three discourtesy level calculation methods are explored: acceleration-based courtesy, jerk-based courtesy, and speed-based courtesy. Each method provides a metric that influences how the model adjusts its predictions based on the driving context.

Our study explores the different combinations of three mainstream car-following models with the three aforementioned discourtesy level calculation methods. Below is the overview of the architecture of each car-following model.

In the realm of car-following dynamics, the formulation of an effective loss function is paramount for model training and optimization. Given the initial state of the car-following scenario, characterized by the velocity profiles of the LV and the FV, the prediction of the spacing between these vehicles is a critical aspect and is facilitated through the application of system update equations according to Zhu $et$ $al.$ [36].

The evolution of the system over discrete time intervals $\Delta T$ is encapsulated by the following equations:

where $\Delta T$ represents the simulation time interval, $S$ denotes the spacing between the two vehicles, and $V_{FV}$ and $V_{LV}$ represent the velocities of the following vehicle and lead vehicle, respectively. The loss function for the EBG model is composed of three distinct components, aimed at capturing speed prediction accuracy, spacing accuracy, and courtesy alignment.

HighD dataset [50] is proposed by the Institute of Automotive Engineering at RWTH Aachen University in Germany, and offers a comprehensive collection of high-precision driving data. This dataset provides in-depth data on vehicle positions and speeds, obtained from bird’s-eye view videos of six distinct roads in the Cologne area. Data acquisition was performed using a high-resolution 4K camera mounted on an aerial drone, guaranteeing positional accuracy within 10 cm, as depicted in Fig. 4. The dataset employs advanced computer vision techniques to enhance data quality, utilizing Bayesian smoothing to eliminate noise and achieve smooth motion data. It encompasses more than 110,500 vehicles recorded from six distinct locations, providing automatic extraction of vehicle trajectory, size, type, and maneuvers.

Waymo, a self-driving car company under Alphabet, has introduced the Waymo Open Dataset [51], a comprehensive collection of high-resolution sensor data, illustrated in Fig. 4. This dataset encompasses lidar and camera data, delivering accurate 3D vehicle poses and annotated object information. With 1950 scenes, each lasting 20 seconds, the Waymo dataset captures diverse driving scenarios, including expressways and urban streets.

Building upon our established car-following benchmark [5], we extracted car-following events pertinent to this study. The specific criteria are outlined below:

• •

  The identification number of the lead vehicle should remain constant, indicating that the following vehicle is consistently following the same lead vehicle.

• •

  The duration of the car-following event should be longer than 15 seconds, guaranteeing that there is enough data to be analyzed for each event.

Over 13,980 car-following events (12,540 from HighD and 1,440 from Waymo) were analyzed for this research. To assess model performance under realistic driving conditions, the data was allocated 70/15/15 for training, validation, and testing.

To comprehensively assess the performance of the proposed EditFollower framework, we employ 4 key evaluation metrics. The chosen metrics include Spacing Mean Squared Error (Spacing MSE), Speed Mean Squared Error (Speed MSE), Courtesy Mean Squared Error (Courtesy MSE), and Courtesy Metric Correlation.

• •

  Spacing MSE: Measures the mean squared error between predicted and ground truth spacing values. It quantifies the accuracy of spacing predictions.

• •

  Speed MSE: Quantifies the mean squared error between predicted and actual speeds. This metric assesses the precision of speed predictions.

• •

  Courtesy MSE: Evaluates the mean squared error between predicted and target discourtesy levels. It gauges the accuracy of discourtesy level predictions.

• •

  Courtesy Metric Correlation: Examines the correlation between predicted discourtesy levels and labeled discourtesy levels.

In speed-based courtesy, The Edit_LSTM_IDM model stands out with the lowest Spacing MSE (6.070), Speed MSE (0.283), and Courtesy MSE (0.0003). It achieves a remarkably high Courtesy Metric Correlation of 0.972, indicating strong alignment with desired discourtesy levels.

In acceleration-based courtesy, The Edit_LSTM_IDM model again demonstrates outstanding performance with the lowest Spacing MSE (7.283), Speed MSE (0.568), and Courtesy MSE (0.068). It maintains a high Courtesy Metric Correlation of 0.846, showcasing effective alignment with desired discourtesy levels.

Through analyzing the results presented in the tables, a comparative assessment of different models highlights the effectiveness of our proposed method. The key observations include:

• •

  Models incorporating discourtesy levels consistently outperform baseline models across datasets and courtesy calculation methods.

• •

  For the HighD dataset, Speed-based courtesy models, particularly Edit_LSTM_IDM, demonstrate strong performance in reducing MSE for spacing and speed, as well as effective courtesy alignment. For the Waymo dataset, Acceleration-based courtesy models, Edit_LSTM_IDM also exhibit competitive performance.

• •

  The Courtesy MSE is minimal, and the Courtesy Metric Correlation is high, demonstrating effective alignment with desired discourtesy levels.

These results underscore the effectiveness of the proposed editable behavior generation model in generating realistic car-following behaviors with desired discourtesy levels. The model not only reduces errors in spacing and speed prediction but also ensures a strong correlation between predicted and desired discourtesy levels. The ability to tailor car-following behaviors based on discourtesy levels adds a valuable dimension to the modeling process, contributing to improved accuracy and realism in simulations.

1. 1.

   Adjusting discourtesy values to 50% and 150% of the original, as shown in Fig. 5, we observe distinct characteristics in the time gap distribution. Specifically, the 150% discourtesy values exhibit an overall left-skewed distribution, with a higher concentration around 1.4 seconds, indicating more aggressive car-following behavior [52].

2. 2.

   Comparative analysis of different input discourtesy values over the entire test set reveals a positive correlation between input discourtesy levels and the corresponding output, as shown in Fig. 6, this suggests that the model effectively adjusts car-following behavior based on the input courtesy, achieving the desired discourtesy levels.

3. 3.

   To provide a more insightful illustration of the influence of discourtesy levels on car-following behavior, Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 showcase variations in speed and spacing derived from real-world data. Additionally, Fig. 9 presents simulated lead vehicle speeds, characterized by a pattern resembling a sine function. Notably, the observed trend indicates that with an increase in discourtesy levels, the following distance diminishes. This reduction implies a transition towards more aggressive car-following behavior, as vehicles tend to close the gap more rapidly.

   

   

   

   

   

   

Current ACC systems often employ fixed following distances, providing drivers with limited options, such as selecting long, medium, or short following distances. However, drivers have their own preferences, and maintaining a fixed distance may lead to challenges such as cut-ins when following too closely. Introducing a continuous and adjustable discourtesy level in ACC systems would enhance user experience and increase system penetration. Drivers could customize their driving preferences, leading to improved ACC adoption and overall driving satisfaction.