Normally, autonomous vehicles (AVs) are limited to be widely used in market not only for technical factors, but also psychological reasons. Considering the psychological feelings of drivers during switching manned to unmanned operation modes, an algorithm for avoiding obstacles is designed for AVs by considering driver psychological feelings. A so-called confidence-limit-distance (denoted as CLD) for driver to avoid obstacle is experimentally obtained by a number of real track tests with 100 volunteer test drivers as required to approach the obstacle in a certain way. Based on Artificial Potential Field (APF) method, a road potential field is established accordingly to characterize the information on the real road. To express the different influences of obstacles on the driver’s psychological feeling in both longitudinal and lateral directions, a confidence potential field also is established based on a two-dimensional normal distribution combining von Mises distribution. Hence, the second-order Taylor expansions of the road potential field and the confidence potential field are firstly introduced into the cost functions for model predictive control (MPC). The corresponding MPC algorithm used here selects front-wheel steering angle as the control variable to be solved. The CLD and range of sensed vehicle motion state variables are taken as the constraints of the MPC. Co-simulations and Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) tests are carried out, showing the effectiveness of designed algorithm, which can be useful in the development and design for Advanced Driving Assistant System (ADAS) and AVs.
RosenbandDL. Inside Waymo’s self-driving car: my favorite transistors. In: Symposium on vlsi circuits, Kyoto, Japan, 5–8 June 2017. IEEE.
2.
StevenA. New eye on the road. SAE Autom Eng2017(3): 2–3.
3.
ElshamliAAbdullahHAAreibiS. Genetic algorithm for dynamic path planning. In: Conference on electrical & computer engineering, Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, 2–5 May 2004. IEEE.
4.
YunSCGanapathyVChongLO. Improved genetic algorithms based optimum path planning for mobile robot. In: International conference on control automation robotics & vision, Singapore, 7–10 December 2010, 2011. IEEE.
5.
BenavidesF. Real path planning based on genetic algorithm and Voronoi diagrams. In: IEEE IX Latin American & IEEE Colombian conference on robotics symposium, Bogota, Colombia, 1–4 October 2011. IEEE.
6.
DijkstraEW. A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numer Math1959; 1: 269–271.
7.
HartPENilssonNJRaphaelB. A formal basis for the heuristic determination of minimum cost paths. IEEE Trans Syst Sci Cybern1972; 4(37): 28–29.
8.
StentzA. Optimal and efficient path planning for partially-known environments. In: IEEE international conference on robotics & automation, San Diego, CA, USA, 8–13 May 1994, 2002. IEEE.
9.
ChenJZhaoPMeiT, et al. Lane change path planning based on piecewise Bezier curve for autonomous vehicle. In: International conference on vehicular electronics and safety, Dongguan, China, 28–30 July 2013, pp.17–22. IEEE.
10.
MillerICampbellMDanH, et al. Team Cornell’s skynet: robust perception and planning in an urban environment. J Field Rob2008; 25(8): 493–527.
11.
ParkMGJeonJHLeeMC. Obstacle-avoidance for mobile robots using artificial potential field approach with simulated annealing. In: IEEE international symposium on industrial electronics, Pusan, South Korea, 12–16 June 2001. IEEE.
12.
LiGTongSCongF, et al. Improved artificial potential field-based simultaneous forward search method for robot path planning in complex environment. In: IEEE/SICE international symposium on system integration, Nagoya, Japan, 11–13 December 2015, 2016. IEEE.
13.
HayakawaYWhiteRKimuraT, et al. Driver-compatible steering system for wide speed-range path following. Mechatron IEEE/ASME Trans2004; 9(3): 544–552.
14.
NettoMBlossevilleJMLusettiB, et al. A new robust control system with optimized use of the lane detection data for vehicle full lateral control under strong curvatures. In: IEEE intelligent transportation systems conference, Toronto, ON, Canada, 17–20 September 2006, IEEE.
15.
SoudbakhshDEskandarianA. A collision avoidance steering controller using linear quadratic regulator. SAE Technical Papers, 2010.
16.
LevinsonJAskelandJBeckerJ, et al. Towards fully autonomous driving: systems and algorithms. In: Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Baden-Baden, Germany, 5–9 June 2011, IEEE.
17.
MacadamCC. An optimal preview control for linear systems. J Dyn Syst Meas Control1980; 102(3): 188–190.
18.
GuoKGuanH. Modelling of driver/vehicle directional control system. Veh Syst Dyn1993; 22(3): 141–184.
19.
NiJHuJXiangC. Envelope control for four-wheel independently actuated autonomous ground vehicle through AFS/DYC integrated control. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2017; 66(11): 9712–9726.
20.
YakubFMoriY. Comparative study of autonomous path-following vehicle control via model predictive control and linear quadratic control. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2015; 229(12): 1695–1714.
21.
LiuJJayakumarPOverholtJL, et al. The role of model fidelity in model predictive control based hazard avoidance in unmanned ground vehicles using LIDAR sensors. In: Proceedings of ASME dynamic systems and control conference, Palo Alto, California, USA, 21–23 October 2013, pp.1–10. ASME.
22.
GarcíaCEPrettDMMorariM. Model predictive control: Theory and practice—A survey. Automatica1989; 25(3): 335–348.
23.
BorrelliFFalconePKeviczkyT, et al. MPC-based approach to active steering for autonomous vehicle systems. Int J Veh Auton Syst2005; 3(2/3/4): 265.
24.
FalconePBorrelliFAsgariJ, et al. Predictive active steering control for autonomous vehicle systems. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2007; 15(3): 566–580.
25.
BarbarisiOPalmieriGScalaS, et al. LTV-MPC for yaw rate control and side slip control with dynamically constrained differential braking. In: European Journal of Control, Budapest, Hungary, 23–26 August 2009, pp.4810–4815. IEEE.
26.
JalaliMKhajepourAChenS K, et al. Integrated stability and traction control for electric vehicles using model predictive control. Control Eng Pract2016; 54: 256–266.
27.
WeiskircherTWangQAyalewB. Predictive guidance and control framework for (semi-)autonomous vehicles in public traffic. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2017; 25(6): 2034–2046.
28.
KimDParkJMoonS, et al. Design of a path tracking scheme and collision avoidance controller for autonomous vehicles. IFAC Proc Vol2009; 42(15): 391–398.
29.
FunkeJBrownMErlienSM, et al. Collision Avoidance and stabilization for autonomous vehicles in emergency scenarios. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol2017; 25(4): 1204–1216.
30.
ShariffABonnefonJ-FRahwanI. Psychological roadblocks to the adoption of self-driving vehicles. Nat Hum Behav2017; 1(10): 694–696.
31.
AbrahamHLeeCBradyS, et al. Autonomous vehicles and alternatives to driving: trust, preferences, and effects of age. In: Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 96th Annual Meeting, Washington DC, USA, 8–12 January 2017. TRB.
32.
XuZZhangKMinH, et al. What drives people to accept autonomous vehicles? Findings from a field experiment. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol2018; 95(10): 320–334.
33.
EckertAHartmannBSevenichM, et al. Emergency steer & brake assist: a systematic approach for system integration of two complementary driver assistance systems. In: Proc. 22nd Int. technical conference on enhanced safety of vehicles, Washington DC, USA, 2011. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
34.
LuHShiYHeD, et al. Model-based vehicle stability control with tyre force and instantaneous cornering stiffness estimation. Proc IMechE Part D: J Automobile Engineering2016: 230(6): 754–770.
35.
KhatibO. Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots. Int J Rob Res1986; 5(1): 90–98.
36.
TangZ-RJiJWuM-Y, et al. Vehicles path planning and tracking based on an improved artificial potential field method. J Southwest Univ (Nat Sci Ed) 2018; 40(6): 174–182.
37.
MardiaKVJuppPE. Directional statistics. Chichester: John Wiley Sons, 2009.
38.
CagienardRGriederPKerriganEC, et al. Move blocking strategies in receding horizon control. J Process Control2007; 17(6): 563–570.
39.
NotoNOkudaHTazakiY, et al. Steering assisting system for obstacle avoidance based on personalized potential field. In: 2012 15th international IEEE conference on intelligent transportation systems, Anchorage, AK, 16–19 September 2012, pp.1702–1707. IEEE.
