To ensure that autonomous vehicles satisfy the requirements of the traffic environment, vehicle driving ability, and desired driver experience during obstacle avoidance, this paper proposes a trajectory planner that considers three aspects: driving passability, regional safety, and driving acceptance. Multiresolution state lattices and Bézier curve fitters are applied to a state lattice framework to generate candidate obstacle avoidance trajectory clusters. Trajectory evaluation is then carried out in the above three aspects by using trajectory passability, safety and driver behavior proximity, and a trajectory evaluation function is designed to evaluate and screen trajectory clusters. The trajectory passability is checked by the vehicle motion capability set, which is established based on the vehicle dynamics model. The trajectory safety is evaluated by the potential field function between the fitted trajectory and the vehicle driving environment boundary with consideration of the inevitable collision state. The parameters of the vehicle motion state for the fitted trajectory are matched with the driving data of real drivers with different driving styles to evaluate the proximity between the trajectory and driver behavior. The rationality and effectiveness of different driving styles of trajectory planners are verified by vehicle tests under different vehicle velocities and different obstacle disturbances.
GonzálezDPérezJMilanésV, et al. A review of motion planning techniques for automated vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2016; 17(4): 1135–1145.
2.
WerlingMKammelSZieglerJ, et al. Optimal trajectories for time-critical street scenarios using discretized terminal manifolds. Int J Robot Res2012; 31(3): 346–359.
3.
OliveiraRCirilloMMårtenssonJ.Combining lattice-based planning and path optimization in autonomous heavy duty vehicle applications. In: IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2018, pp.2090–2097.
4.
McNaughtonMUrmsonCDolanJM, et al. Motion planning for autonomous driving with a conformal spatiotemporal lattice. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2011, pp.4889–4895.
5.
ZhangCChuDLiuS, et al. Trajectory planning and tracking for autonomous vehicle based on state lattice and model predictive control. In: IEEE intelligent transportation systems magazine. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2019, pp.29–40.
6.
ChoiJWHuhtalaK.Constrained path optimization with Bézier curve primitives. In: IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2014, pp.246–251.
7.
RastelliJPLattaruloRNashashibiF. Dynamic trajectory generation using continuous-curvature algorithms for door to door assistance vehicles. In: IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2014, pp.510–515.
8.
González BergmanKLjungqvistOAxehillD. Improved optimization of motion primitives for motion planning in state lattices. In: IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2019, pp.2307–2314.
9.
ChoiJHuhtalaK.Constrained global path optimization for articulated steering vehicles. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2014; 65(4): 246251.
10.
TanzmeisterGWollherrDBussM.Grid-based multi-road-course estimation using motion planning. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2016; 65(4): 1924–1935.
11.
CirilloM. From videogames to autonomous trucks: a new algorithm for lattice-based motion planning. In: IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2017, pp.148–153.
12.
LjungqvistOEvestedtNCirilloM, et al. Lattice-based motion planning for a general 2-trailer system. In: IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2017, pp.819–824.
13.
DorrDGrabengiesserDGauterinF.Online driving style recognition using fuzzy logic. In: IEEE 17th international conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2014, pp.1021–1026.
14.
ButakovVAIoannouP.Personalized driver/vehicle lane change models for ADAS. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2015; 64(10): 4422–4431.
15.
MartinezCMHeuckeMWangFY, et al. Driving style recognition for intelligent vehicle control and advanced driver assistance: a survey. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2018; 19(3): 666–676.
16.
MurpheyYLMiltonRKiliarisL. Driver’s style classification using jerk analysis. In: 2009 IEEE workshop on computational intelligence in vehicles and vehicular systems. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2009.
17.
RathJJSenouthCPopieulJC.Personalized lane keeping assist strategy: adaptation to driving style. IET Contr Theory Appl2015; 13(1): 106–115.
18.
ChuDDengZHeY, et al. Curve speed model for driver assistance based on driving style classification. IET Intell Transp Syst2017; 11(8): 501–510.
19.
BellemHSchönenbergTKremsJF, et al. Objective metrics of comfort: developing a driving style for highly automated vehicles. IET Intell Transp Syst2016; 41: 45–54.
20.
FengJWangCXuC, et al. Active collision avoidance strategy considering motion uncertainty of the pedestrian. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2020; 21(8): 3485–3496.
21.
LiHWuCChuD, et al. Combined trajectory planning and tracking for autonomous vehicle considering driving styles. IEEE Access2021; 9: 9453–9463.
22.
HangPLvCHuangC, et al. An integrated framework of decision making and motion planning for autonomous vehicles considering social behaviors. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2020; 69(12): 14458–14469.
23.
KarlssonJWaverenSVPekC, et al. Encoding human driving styles in motion planning for autonomous vehicles. In: 2020 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2021.
24.
RosbachSJamesVGroßjohannS, et al. Driving style encoder: situational reward adaptation for general-purpose planning in automated driving. In: 2020 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2020, pp.6419–6425.
25.
GonzálezSAMucientesMBugarínA.Motion planning under uncertainty in graduated fidelity lattices. Robot Auton Syst2018; 109: 168–182.
26.
DangRWangJLiSE, et al. Coordinated adaptive cruise control system with lane-change assistance. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2015; 16(5): 2373–2383.
HanLYashiroHNejadHTN. Bézier curve based path planning for autonomous vehicle in urban environment. In: IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE, 2010, pp. 1036–1042.
29.
AbeM.Vehicle handling dynamics: theory and application. Burlington: Elsevier Science Technology, 2015.
30.
CiboogluMKarapinarUSoylemezMT. Hybrid controller approach for an autonomous ground vehicle path tracking problem. In: 25th Mediterranean conference on control and automation (MED), 2017, pp.583–588.
31.
HuLBaoXLinM, et al. Research on risky driving behavior evaluation model based on CIDAS real data. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2021; 11: 1–10.
32.
International standard. Mechanical vibration and shock evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration. 1997; ISO 2631-1: 1997(E).
33.
LiZWuCTaoP, et al. DP&DS-LCD: a new lane change decision model coupling driver’s psychology and driving style. IEEE Access2020; 8: 132614–132624.
34.
WangWXiJChongA, et al. Driving style classification using a semisupervised support vector machine. IEEE Trans Hum-Machine Syst2017; 47(5): 650–660.
35.
FreyBJDueckD.Clustering by passing messages between data points. Science2007; 315(5814): 972976.
36.
SavinoGGiovanniniFFitzharrisM, et al. Inevitable collision states for motorcycle-to-car collision scenarios. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2016; 17(9): 2563–2573.
37.
HuLHuXWangJ, et al. Casualty risk of e-bike rider struck by passenger vehicle using China in-depth accident data. Traffic Inj Prev2020; 21(4): 283–287.
38.
HowardTMKellyA.Optimal rough terrain trajectory generation for wheeled mobile robots. Int J Robot Res2007; 26(2): 141–166.
