Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Beyond RMSE: Do Machine-Learned Models of Road User Interaction Produce Human-Like Behavior?

Published: 01 July 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Autonomous vehicles use a variety of sensors and machine-learned models to predict the behavior of surrounding road users. Most of the machine-learned models in the literature focus on quantitative error metrics like the root mean square error (RMSE) to learn and report their models’ capabilities. This focus on quantitative error metrics tends to ignore the more important behavioral aspect of the models, raising the question of whether these models really predict human-like behavior. Thus, we propose to analyze the output of machine-learned models much like we would analyze human data in conventional behavioral research. We introduce quantitative metrics to demonstrate presence of three different behavioral phenomena in a naturalistic highway driving dataset: 1) The kinematics-dependence of who passes a merging point first 2) Lane change by an on-highway vehicle to accommodate an on-ramp vehicle 3) Lane changes by vehicles on the highway to avoid lead vehicle conflicts. Then, we analyze the behavior of three machine-learned models using the same metrics. Even though the models’ RMSE value differed, all the models captured the kinematic-dependent merging behavior but struggled at varying degrees to capture the more nuanced courtesy lane change and highway lane change behavior. Additionally, the collision aversion analysis during lane changes showed that the models struggled to capture the physical aspect of human driving: leaving adequate gap between the vehicles. Thus, our analysis highlighted the inadequacy of simple quantitative metrics and the need to take a broader behavioral perspective when analyzing machine-learned models of human driving predictions.

References

[1]
Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for on-Road Motor Vehicles, document J3016c, SAE international, 2018.
[2]
A. Davies, Google’s Self-Driving Car Caused its First Crash (2016). San Francisco, CA, USA: Wired, 2018, pp. 3–5.
[3]
J. Stilgoe, “Who killed Elaine Herzberg?” in Who’s Driving Innovation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2020, pp. 1–6.
[4]
J. Claybrook and S. Kildare, “Autonomous vehicles: No driver no regulation?” Science, vol. 361, no. 6397, pp. 36–37, 2018.
[5]
K. Hilgarter and P. Granig, “Public perception of autonomous vehicles: A qualitative study based on interviews after riding an autonomous shuttle,” Transp. Res. F, Traffic Psychol. Behav., vol. 72, pp. 226–243, Jul. 2020.
[6]
R. Madiganet al., “Acceptance of automated road transport systems (ARTS): An adaptation of the UTAUT model,” Transp. Res. Proc., vol. 14, pp. 2217–2226, Jan. 2016.
[7]
A. Alahi, K. Goel, V. Ramanathan, A. Robicquet, L. Fei-Fei, and S. Savarese, “Social LSTM: Human trajectory prediction in crowded spaces,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. (CVPR), Jun. 2016, pp. 961–971.
[8]
N. Deo and M. M. Trivedi, “Convolutional social pooling for vehicle trajectory prediction,” in Proc. IEEE Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. Workshops, Jun. 2018, pp. 1468–1476.
[9]
X. Li, X. Ying, and M. C. Chuah, “GRIP: Graph-based interaction-aware trajectory prediction,” in Proc. IEEE Intell. Transp. Syst. Conf. (ITSC), Oct. 2019, pp. 3960–3966.
[10]
Y. Ma, X. Zhu, S. Zhang, R. Yang, W. Wang, and D. Manocha, “Trafficpredict: Trajectory prediction for heterogeneous traffic-agents,” in Proc. AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell. (AAAI), vol. 33, no. 1, Feb. 2019, pp. 6120–6127.
[11]
Q. Sun, X. Huang, J. Gu, B. C. Williams, and H. Zhao, “M2i: From factored marginal trajectory prediction to interactive prediction,” in Proc. IEEE/CVF Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. (CVPR), Jun. 2022, pp. 6543–6552.
[12]
T. Phan-Minh, E. C. Grigore, F. A. Boulton, O. Beijbom, and E. M. Wolff, “CoverNet: Multimodal behavior prediction using trajectory sets,” in Proc. IEEE/CVF Conf. Comput. Vis. Pattern Recognit. (CVPR), Jun. 2020, pp. 14074–14083.
[13]
S. Ettingeret al., “Large scale interactive motion forecasting for autonomous driving: The Waymo open motion dataset,” in Proc. IEEE/CVF Int. Conf. Comput. Vis., Oct. 2021, pp. 9710–9719.
[14]
J. Ngiamet al., “Scene transformer: A unified architecture for predicting future trajectories of multiple agents,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Learn. Represent. (ICLR), 2022. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=Wm3EA5OlHsG
[15]
G. Markkulaet al., “Defining interactions: A conceptual framework for understanding interactive behaviour in human and automated road traffic,” Theor. Issues Ergonom. Sci., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 728–752, 2020.
[16]
F. Camaraet al., “Pedestrian models for autonomous driving—Part I: Low-level models, from sensing to tracking,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 6131–6151, Oct. 2021.
[17]
F. Camaraet al., “Pedestrian models for autonomous driving—Part II: High-level models of human behavior,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 5453–5472, Sep. 2020.
[18]
L. Claussmann, M. Revilloud, D. Gruyer, and S. Glaser, “A review of motion planning for highway autonomous driving,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 1826–1848, May 2020.
[19]
L. Ye, Z. Wang, X. Chen, J. Wang, K. Wu, and K. Lu, “GSAN: Graph self-attention network for learning spatial temporal interaction representation in autonomous driving,” IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 9190–9204, Jun. 2022.
[20]
D. Lee, Y. Gu, J. Hoang, and M. Marchetti-Bowick, “Joint interaction and trajectory prediction for autonomous driving using graph neural networks,” 2019, arXiv:1912.07882.
[21]
S. Mozaffari, O. Y. Al-Jarrah, M. Dianati, P. Jennings, and A. Mouzakitis, “Deep learning-based vehicle behavior prediction for autonomous driving applications: A review,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 33–47, Jan. 2022.
[22]
A. Zgonnikov, S. Thill, P. Beckerle, and C. M. Jonker, “Modeling human behavior in human-robot interactions,” in Proc. ACM/IEEE Int. Conf. Hum.-Robot Interact., Mar. 2022, pp. 1296–1297.
[23]
I. Rahwanet al., “Machine behaviour,” Nature, vol. 568, no. 7753, pp. 477–486, 2019.
[24]
M. Hermanet al., “Pedestrian behavior prediction for automated driving: Requirements, metrics, and relevant features,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 23, no. 9, pp. 14922–14937, Sep. 2022.
[25]
O. Siebinga, A. Zgonnikov, and D. Abbink, “A human factors approach to validating driver models for interaction-aware automated vehicles,” J. Hum.-Robot Interact., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 1–21, May 2022.
[26]
P. Karle, M. Geisslinger, J. Betz, and M. Lienkamp, “Scenario understanding and motion prediction for autonomous vehicles review and comparison,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 23, no. 10, pp. 16962–16982, Oct. 2022.
[27]
G. Markkulaet al. (Jun. 2022). Explaining Human Interactions on the Road Requires Large-Scale Integration of Psychological Theory. [Online]. Available: https:psyarxiv.com/hdxbs
[28]
C. F. Choudhury, V. Ramanujam, and M. Ben-Akiva, “Modeling acceleration decisions for freeway merges,” Transp. Res. Rec., J. Transp. Res. Board, vol. 2124, no. 1, pp. 45–57, 2009.
[29]
K. Kang and H. A. Rakha, “Game theoretical approach to model decision making for merging maneuvers at freeway on-ramps,” Transp. Res. Rec., vol. 2623, no. 1, pp. 19–28, 2017.
[30]
A.-H. Olivier, A. Marin, A. Crétual, A. Berthoz, and J. Pettré, “Collision avoidance between two Walkers: Role-dependent strategies,” Gait Posture, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 751–756, 2013.
[31]
Z. Zheng, “Recent developments and research needs in modeling lane changing,” Transp. Res. B, Methodol., vol. 60, pp. 16–32, Feb. 2014.
[32]
A. Kondyli and L. Elefteriadou, “Driver behavior at freeway-ramp merging areas: Focus group findings,” Transp. Res. Rec., vol. 2124, no. 1, pp. 157–166, 2009.
[33]
A. R. Srinivasanet al., “Comparing merging behaviors observed in naturalistic data with behaviors generated by a machine learned model,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Intell. Transp. Syst. Conf. (ITSC), Sep. 2021, pp. 3787–3792.
[34]
Y. Zhang and P. A. Ioannou, “Combined variable speed limit and lane change control for highway traffic,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 1812–1823, Jul. 2017.
[35]
R. S. Tomar, S. Verma, and G. Tomar, “Prediction of lane change trajectories through neural network,” in Proc. Int. Conf. Comput. Intell. Commun. Netw., Nov. 2010, pp. 249–253.
[36]
H. Jula, E. B. Kosmatopoulos, and P.A. Ioannou, “Collision avoidance analysis for lane changing and merging,” IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 2295–2308, Nov. 1999.
[37]
J. Nilsson, J. Silvlin, M. Brannstrom, E. Coelingh, and J. Fredriksson, “If, when, and how to perform lane change maneuvers on highways,” IEEE Intell. Transp. Syst. Mag., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 68–78, Oct. 2016.
[38]
U. J. Colyar. Next Generation Simulation (NGSIM) Vehicle Trajectories and Supporting Data. Accessed: Mar. 21, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://data.transportation.gov/Automobiles/Next-Generation-Simulation-NGSIM-Vehicle-Trajector/8ect-6jqj
[39]
C. L. Baker, R. Saxe, and J. B. Tenenbaum, “Action understanding as inverse planning,” Cognition, vol. 113, no. 3, pp. 329–349, 2009.
[40]
A. Knittel, M. Hawasly, S. V. Albrecht, J. Redford, and S. Ramamoorthy, “DiPA: Probabilistic multi-modal interactive prediction for autonomous driving,” 2022, arXiv:2210.06106.
[41]
B. Mersch, T. Höllen, K. Zhao, C. Stachniss, and R. Roscher, “Maneuver-based trajectory prediction for self-driving cars using spatio-temporal convolutional networks,” in Proc. IEEE/RSJ Int. Conf. Intell. Robots Syst. (IROS), Sep. 2021, pp. 4888–4895.
[42]
C. Tang and R. R. Salakhutdinov, “Multiple futures prediction,” in Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., vol. 32, 2019, pp. 15424–15434.
[43]
S. V. Albrechtet al., “Interpretable goal-based prediction and planning for autonomous driving,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Robot. Autom. (ICRA), May 2021, pp. 1043–1049.
[44]
M. Antonello, M. Dobre, S. V. Albrecht, J. Redford, and S. Ramamoorthy, “Flash: Fast and light motion prediction for autonomous driving with Bayesian inverse planning and learned motion profiles,” 2022, arXiv:2203.08251.
[45]
R. C. Coulter, “Implementation of the pure pursuit path tracking algorithm,” Carnegie-Mellon Univ. Pittsburgh PA Robotics INST, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, Tech. Rep. CMU-RI-TR-92-01, 1992. [Online]. Available: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA255524.pdf
[46]
S. Lefèvre, C. Sun, R. Bajcsy, and C. Laugier, “Comparison of parametric and non-parametric approaches for vehicle speed prediction,” in Proc. Amer. Control Conf., Jun. 2014, pp. 3494–3499.
[47]
G. Markkula, J. Engström, J. Lodin, J. Bärgman, and T. Victor, “A farewell to brake reaction times? Kinematics-dependent brake response in naturalistic rear-end emergencies,” Accident Anal. Prevention, vol. 95, pp. 209–226, Oct. 2016.
[48]
D. N. Lee, “A theory of visual control of braking based on information about time-to-collision,” Perception, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 437–459, 1976.
[49]
J. Gu, Q. Sun, and H. Zhao, “DenseTNT: Waymo open dataset motion prediction challenge 1st place solution,” 2021, arXiv:2106.14160.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems  Volume 24, Issue 7
July 2023
1120 pages

Publisher

IEEE Press

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2023

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 0
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media