skip to main content
10.1145/3583780.3615072acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Target-Oriented Maneuver Decision for Autonomous Vehicle: A Rule-Aided Reinforcement Learning Framework

Authors Info & Claims
Published:21 October 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

Autonomous driving systems (ADSs) have the potential to revolutionize transportation by improving traffic safety and efficiency. As the core component of ADSs, maneuver decision aims to make tactical decisions to accomplish road following, obstacle avoidance, and efficient driving. In this work, we consider a typical but rarely studied task, called Target-Lane-Entering (TLE), where an autonomous vehicle should enter a target lane before reaching an intersection to ensure a smooth transition to another road. For navigation-assisted autonomous driving, a maneuver decision module chooses the optimal timing to enter the target lane in each road section, thus avoiding rerouting and reducing travel time. To achieve the TLE task, we propose a ruLe-aided reINforcement lEarning framework, called LINE, which combines the advantages of RL-based policy and rule-based strategy, allowing the autonomous vehicle to make target-oriented maneuver decisions. Specifically, an RL-based policy with a hybrid reward function is able to make safe, efficient, and comfortable decisions while considering the factors of target lanes. Then a strategy of rule revision aims to help the policy learn from intervention and block the risk of missing target lanes. Extensive experiments based on the SUMO simulator confirm the effectiveness of our framework. The results show that LINE achieves state-of-the-art driving performance with over 95% task success rate.

References

  1. Szilárd Aradi. 2020. Survey of deep reinforcement learning for motion planning of autonomous vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 23, 2 (2020), 740--759.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Jin Chen, Guanyu Ye, Yan Zhao, Shuncheng Liu, Liwei Deng, Xu Chen, Rui Zhou, and Kai Zheng. 2022. Efficient Join Order Selection Learning with Graph-based Representation. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 97--107.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Jianyu Chen, Bodi Yuan, and Masayoshi Tomizuka. 2019b. Deep imitation learning for autonomous driving in generic urban scenarios with enhanced safety. In 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2884--2890.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Yilun Chen, Chiyu Dong, Praveen Palanisamy, Priyantha Mudalige, Katharina Muelling, and John M Dolan. 2019a. Attention-based hierarchical deep reinforcement learning for lane change behaviors in autonomous driving. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops. 0--0.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Kashyap Chitta, Aditya Prakash, Bernhard Jaeger, Zehao Yu, Katrin Renz, and Andreas Geiger. 2022. Transfuser: Imitation with transformer-based sensor fusion for autonomous driving. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (2022).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Luca Cultrera, Lorenzo Seidenari, Federico Becattini, Pietro Pala, and Alberto Del Bimbo. 2020. Explaining autonomous driving by learning end-to-end visual attention. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops. 340--341.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Shengzhe Dai, Li Li, and Zhiheng Li. 2019. Modeling vehicle interactions via modified LSTM models for trajectory prediction. IEEE Access, Vol. 7 (2019), 38287--38296.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Jiqian Dong, Sikai Chen, Yujie Li, Runjia Du, Aaron Steinfeld, and Samuel Labi. 2021. Space-weighted information fusion using deep reinforcement learning: The context of tactical control of lane-changing autonomous vehicles and connectivity range assessment. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 128 (2021), 103192.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Leonard Evans. 1991. Traffic safety and the driver. Science Serving Society.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Sorin Grigorescu, Bogdan Trasnea, Tiberiu Cocias, and Gigel Macesanu. 2020. A survey of deep learning techniques for autonomous driving. Journal of Field Robotics, Vol. 37, 3 (2020), 362--386.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Guy Hacohen and Daphna Weinshall. 2019. On the power of curriculum learning in training deep networks. In International Conference on Machine Learning. PMLR, 2535--2544.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Matteo Hessel, Joseph Modayil, Hado Van Hasselt, Tom Schaul, Georg Ostrovski, Will Dabney, Dan Horgan, Bilal Piot, Mohammad Azar, and David Silver. 2018. Rainbow: Combining improvements in deep reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, Vol. 32.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Carl-Johan Hoel, Katherine Driggs-Campbell, Krister Wolff, Leo Laine, and Mykel J Kochenderfer. 2019. Combining planning and deep reinforcement learning in tactical decision making for autonomous driving. IEEE transactions on intelligent vehicles, Vol. 5, 2 (2019), 294--305.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Zhiyu Huang, Jingda Wu, and Chen Lv. 2022. Efficient deep reinforcement learning with imitative expert priors for autonomous driving. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2022).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Arne Kesting, Martin Treiber, and Dirk Helbing. 2010. Enhanced intelligent driver model to access the impact of driving strategies on traffic capacity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 368, 1928 (2010), 4585--4605.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. B Ravi Kiran, Ibrahim Sobh, Victor Talpaert, Patrick Mannion, Ahmad A Al Sallab, Senthil Yogamani, and Patrick Pérez. 2021. Deep reinforcement learning for autonomous driving: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 23, 6 (2021), 4909--4926.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Luc Le Mero, Dewei Yi, Mehrdad Dianati, and Alexandros Mouzakitis. 2022. A survey on imitation learning techniques for end-to-end autonomous vehicles. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2022).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Shuncheng Liu, Han Su, Yan Zhao, Kai Zeng, and Kai Zheng. 2021. Lane change scheduling for autonomous vehicle: A prediction-and-search framework. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery & Data Mining. 3343--3353.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Pablo Alvarez Lopez, Michael Behrisch, Laura Bieker-Walz, Jakob Erdmann, Yun-Pang Flötteröd, Robert Hilbrich, Leonhard Lücken, Johannes Rummel, Peter Wagner, and Evamarie Wießner. 2018. Microscopic traffic simulation using sumo. In 2018 21st international conference on intelligent transportation systems (ITSC). IEEE, 2575--2582.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Branka Mirchevska, Christian Pek, Moritz Werling, Matthias Althoff, and Joschka Boedecker. 2018. High-level decision making for safe and reasonable autonomous lane changing using reinforcement learning. In 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC). IEEE, 2156--2162.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Alex Graves, Ioannis Antonoglou, Daan Wierstra, and Martin Riedmiller. 2013. Playing atari with deep reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1312.5602 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Volodymyr Mnih, Koray Kavukcuoglu, David Silver, Andrei A Rusu, Joel Veness, Marc G Bellemare, Alex Graves, Martin Riedmiller, Andreas K Fidjeland, Georg Ostrovski, et al. 2015. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. nature, Vol. 518, 7540 (2015), 529--533.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Sanmit Narvekar and Peter Stone. 2018. Learning curriculum policies for reinforcement learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.00285 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Daniel E Rivera, Manfred Morari, and Sigurd Skogestad. 1986. Internal model control: PID controller design. Industrial & engineering chemistry process design and development, Vol. 25, 1 (1986), 252--265.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Ahmad El Sallab, Mohammed Abdou, Etienne Perot, and Senthil Yogamani. 2016. End-to-end deep reinforcement learning for lane keeping assist. arXiv preprint arXiv:1612.04340 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Nitish Srivastava, Geoffrey Hinton, Alex Krizhevsky, Ilya Sutskever, and Ruslan Salakhutdinov. 2014. Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. The journal of machine learning research, Vol. 15, 1 (2014), 1929--1958.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Richard S Sutton and Andrew G Barto. 2018. Reinforcement learning: An introduction. MIT press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Chris Urmson, Joshua Anhalt, Drew Bagnell, Christopher Baker, Robert Bittner, MN Clark, John Dolan, Dave Duggins, Tugrul Galatali, Chris Geyer, et al. 2008. Autonomous driving in urban environments: Boss and the urban challenge. Journal of field Robotics, Vol. 25, 8 (2008), 425--466.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  29. Ardalan Vahidi and Azim Eskandarian. 2003. Research advances in intelligent collision avoidance and adaptive cruise control. IEEE transactions on intelligent transportation systems, Vol. 4, 3 (2003), 143--153.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Junjie Wang, Qichao Zhang, Dongbin Zhao, and Yaran Chen. 2019. Lane change decision-making through deep reinforcement learning with rule-based constraints. In 2019 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN). IEEE, 1--6.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Pin Wang, Ching-Yao Chan, and Arnaud de La Fortelle. 2018a. A reinforcement learning based approach for automated lane change maneuvers. In 2018 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV). IEEE, 1379--1384.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Ziyu Wang, Tom Schaul, Matteo Hessel, Hado Hasselt, Marc Lanctot, and Nando Freitas. 2016. Dueling network architectures for deep reinforcement learning. In International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 1995--2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Ziran Wang, Guoyuan Wu, and Matthew J Barth. 2018b. A review on cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) systems: Architectures, controls, and applications. In 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC). IEEE, 2884--2891.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Jingda Wu, Zhiyu Huang, Wenhui Huang, and Chen Lv. 2022. Prioritized experience-based reinforcement learning with human guidance for autonomous driving. IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems (2022).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Yuyang Xia, Shuncheng Liu, Xu Chen, Zhi Xu, Kai Zheng, and Han Su. 2022. RISE: A Velocity Control Framework with Minimal Impacts based on Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 31st ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 2210--2219.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Jiechao Xiong, Qing Wang, Zhuoran Yang, Peng Sun, Lei Han, Yang Zheng, Haobo Fu, Tong Zhang, Ji Liu, and Han Liu. 2018. Parametrized deep q-networks learning: Reinforcement learning with discrete-continuous hybrid action space. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.06394 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Zhi Xu, Shuncheng Liu, Ziniu Wu, Xu Chen, Kai Zeng, Kai Zheng, and Han Su. 2021. PATROL: A Velocity Control Framework for Autonomous Vehicle via Spatial-Temporal Reinforcement Learning. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Information & Knowledge Management. 2271--2280.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Ekim Yurtsever, Jacob Lambert, Alexander Carballo, and Kazuya Takeda. 2020. A survey of autonomous driving: Common practices and emerging technologies. IEEE access, Vol. 8 (2020), 58443--58469.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Meixin Zhu, Yinhai Wang, Ziyuan Pu, Jingyun Hu, Xuesong Wang, and Ruimin Ke. 2020. Safe, efficient, and comfortable velocity control based on reinforcement learning for autonomous driving. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Vol. 117 (2020), 102662.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Target-Oriented Maneuver Decision for Autonomous Vehicle: A Rule-Aided Reinforcement Learning Framework

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CIKM '23: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
        October 2023
        5508 pages
        ISBN:9798400701245
        DOI:10.1145/3583780

        Copyright © 2023 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 21 October 2023

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate1,861of8,427submissions,22%

        Upcoming Conference

      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)73
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)30

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader