4.0 Article

Predicting human-driving behavior to help driverless vehicles drive: random intercept Bayesian additive regression trees

期刊

STATISTICS AND ITS INTERFACE
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 557-572

出版社

INT PRESS BOSTON, INC
DOI: 10.4310/SII.2018.v11.n4.a1

关键词

Bayesian additive regression trees; Classification and regression trees; Driverless vehicles; Hierarchical models; Longitudinal prediction; Transportation statistics

资金

  1. ATLAS Research Excellence Program project
  2. Toyota Class Action Settlement Safety Research and Education Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of driverless vehicles has spurred the need to predict human driving behavior to facilitate interaction between driverless and human-driven vehicles. This interaction is possible when both driverless and human-driven vehicles are connected through vehicle-to-vehicle communication. Predicting human driving movements can be challenging, and poor prediction models can lead to accidents between the driverless and human-driven vehicles. We used the vehicle speed obtained from a naturalistic driving dataset to predict whether a human-driven vehicle would stop before executing a left turn. To handle the possible non-linear effects and interactions, we used Bayesian additive regression trees (BART). However, BART assumes independent observations, but our dataset consists of multiple observations clustered by driver. Although methods extending BART to clustered or longitudinal data are available, they lack readily available software and can only be applied to clustered continuous outcomes. We extend BART to handle correlated binary observations by adding a random intercept and used a simulation study to investigate its properties. We then successfully implemented our proposed model to our clustered dataset and found substantial improvements in prediction performance compared to BART, BART adjusted for driver level effects, random intercept linear logistic regression, and linear logistic regression.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据