To improve the agility and efficiency of the highway decision-making system and overcome the local optimal dilemma of the existing safety field, this paper builds an improved safety field to reflect the advantage of the reachable states and the learning process is further employed to make the decision long-term optimal. Firstly, the improved safety field is prepared by the kinematic model-based prediction of surrounding vehicles and the boundary is determined elaborately to ensure real-time performance. Then, the field is constructed by three individual fields. One is the kinematic field, which is built based the safe-distance model to measure the colliding risk of both moving or no-moving objects accurately. Another is the road field that reflects the lane-marker constraint. The last is the efficiency field, which is introduced creatively to improve efficiency. Furthermore, the learning algorithm is adopted to learn the long-term optimal state-action sequence in the safety field. Finally, the simulations are conducted in Prescan platform to validate the feasibility of the improved safety field in complex scenarios. The results show that the proposed decision algorithm can always drive autonomous vehicle to the state with a long-term optimal payoff and can improve the overall performance compared to the existing pure safety field and the interaction-aware method.
ClaussmannLRevilloudMGruyerD, et al. A review of motion planning for highway autonomous driving. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2020; 21(5): 1826–1848.
2.
ZhangJZhangBZhangN, et al. A novel robust event-triggered fault tolerant automatic steering control approach of autonomous land vehicles under in-vehicle network delay. Int J Robust Nonlinear Control2021; 31: 2436–2464.
3.
QiHChenYZhangN, et al. Improvement of both handling stability and ride comfort of a vehicle via coupled hydraulically interconnected suspension and electronic controlled air spring. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2020; 234(2–3): 552–571.
4.
QiHZhangNChenY, et al. A comprehensive tune of coupled roll and lateral dynamics and parameter sensitivity study for a vehicle fitted with hydraulically interconnected suspension system. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2021; 235: 143–161.
5.
XuWWeiJDolanJ, et al. A real-time motion planner with trajectory optimization for autonomous vehicles. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), Saint Paul, MN, USA, 14–18 May 2012, pp.2061–2067. New York: IEEE.
6.
VillagraJMilanésVRastelliJP, et al. Path and speed planning for smooth autonomous navigation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), Alcala de Henares, Madrid, Spain, June 2012.
7.
LiuXLiangJZhangH. Dynamic motion planner with trajectory optimisation for automated highway lane-changing driving. IET Intell Transp Syst2020; 14(14): 2133–2140.
8.
HillenbrandJSpiekerAMKroschelK. A multilevel collision mitigation approach—its situation assessment, decision making, and performance tradeoffs. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2006; 7: 528–540.
9.
CaoWMukaiMKawabeT, et al. Cooperative vehicle path generation during merging using model predictive control with real-time optimization. Control Eng Pract2015; 34: 98–105.
10.
SchubertRSchulzeKWanielikG. Situation assessment for automatic lane-change maneuvers. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2010; 11: 607–616.
11.
BahramMWolfAAeberhardM, et al. A prediction-based reactive driving strategy for highly automated driving function on freeways. In: Proceedings of the IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), Dearborn, MI, USA, 8–11 June 2014, pp.400–406. New York: IEEE.
12.
XuCZhaoWWangC. An integrated threat assessment algorithm for decision-making of autonomous driving vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2020; 21: 2510–2521.
13.
YuHTsengHELangariR. A human-like game theory-based controller for automatic lane changing. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol2018; 88: 140–158.
14.
YooJHLangariR. Stackelberg game-based model of highway driving. In: Proceedings of the ASME 5th annual dynamic systems and control conference joint JSME 11th motion vibration conference, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA, 17–19 October 2012, pp.499–508. New York: ASME.
15.
WahidNZamzuriHAmerNH, et al. Vehicle collision avoidance motion planning strategy using artificial potential field with adaptive multi-speed scheduler. IET Intell Transp Syst2020; 14: 1200–1209.
16.
WangJWuJLiY. The driving safety field based on driver–vehicle–road interactions. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2015; 16: 2203–2214.
17.
JiJKhajepourAMelekWW, et al. Path planning and tracking for vehicle collision avoidance based on model predictive control with multiconstraints. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2017; 66: 952–964.
18.
KhatibO. Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots. In: CoxIJWilfongGT (eds) Autonomous robot vehicles. New York, NY: Springer, 1986, pp.396–404.
19.
PamosoajiAKHongKS. A path-planning algorithm using vector potential functions in triangular regions. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst2013; 43(4): 832–842.
20.
HuangZChuDWuC, et al. Path planning and cooperative control for automated vehicle platoon using hybrid Automata. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2019; 20: 959–974.
21.
ShiPZhaoYW. An efficient path planning algorithm for mobile robot using improved potential field. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on ROBIO, Guilin, China, 19–23 December 2009, pp.1704–1708. New York: IEEE.
22.
ZhuMWangXWangY. Human-like autonomous car-following model with deep reinforcement learning. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol2018; 97: 348–368.
23.
LuCWangHLvC, et al. Learning driver-specific behavior for overtaking: a combined learning framework. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2018; 67: 6788–6802.
24.
DesjardinsCChaib-draaB. Cooperative adaptive cruise control: a reinforcement learning approach. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2011; 12: 1248–1260.
25.
LiuJZhaoWXuC. An efficient on-ramp merging strategy for connected and automated vehicles in multi-lane traffic. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2022; 23: 5056–5067.
26.
WangHYuanSGuoM, et al. Tactical driving decisions of unmanned ground vehicles in complex highway environments: a deep reinforcement learning approach. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2021; 235: 1113–1127.
27.
YouCLuJFilevD, et al. Highway traffic modeling and decision making for autonomous vehicle using reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Changshu, China, 26–30 June 2018, pp.1227–1232. New York: IEEE.
28.
WangHYuanSGuoM, et al. A deep reinforcement learning-based approach for autonomous driving in highway on-ramp merge. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2021; 235: 2726–2739.
29.
ZhuMWangYPuZ, et al. Safe, efficient, and comfortable velocity control based on reinforcement learning for autonomous driving. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol2020; 117: 102662.
30.
YuLShaoXYanX. Autonomous overtaking decision making of driverless bus based on deep Q-learning method. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on robotics and biomimetics (ROBIO), Macau, Macao, 5–8 December 2017.
31.
HoelCJWolffKLaineL. Automated speed and lane change decision making using deep reinforcement learning. In: Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC), Maui, HI, USA, 4–7 November 2018, pp.2148–2155. New York: IEEE.
32.
HoelCDriggs-CampbellKWolffK, et al. Combining planning and deep reinforcement learning in tactical decision making for autonomous driving. IEEE Trans Intell Veh2020; 5: 294–305.
33.
YangDJinPPuY, et al. Safe distance car-following model including backward-looking and its stability analysis. Eur Phys J B2013; 86: 92.
