Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper introduces a hierarchical belief model for autonomous driving that represents human behavior across discrete intents and motion modes, updated using Bayesian inference. To address uncertainty, the approach employs an active probing strategy to disambiguate human intentions and subtly influence them towards safer outcomes. A runtime risk-evaluation layer based on Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) ensures that probing actions remain within human risk tolerance, leading to improved success rates and shorter completion times in simulated lane-merging and unsignaled intersection scenarios.
Autonomous vehicles can actively reduce uncertainty and improve safety by gently nudging human drivers toward safer behaviors, rather than just passively reacting to their predicted actions.
Autonomous driving in complex traffic requires reasoning under uncertainty. Common approaches rely on prediction-based planning or risk-aware control, but these are typically treated in isolation, limiting their ability to capture the coupled nature of action and inference in interactive settings. This gap becomes especially critical in uncertain scenarios, where simply reacting to predictions can lead to unsafe maneuvers or overly conservative behavior. Our central insight is that safe interaction requires not only estimating human behavior but also shaping it when ambiguity poses risks. To this end, we introduce a hierarchical belief model that structures human behavior across coarse discrete intents and fine motion modes, updated via Bayesian inference for interpretable multi-resolution reasoning. On top of this, we develop an active probing strategy that identifies when multimodal ambiguity in human predictions may compromise safety and plans disambiguating actions that both reveal intent and gently steer human decisions toward safer outcomes. Finally, a runtime risk-evaluation layer based on Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) ensures that all probing actions remain within human risk tolerance during influence. Our simulations in lane-merging and unsignaled intersection scenarios demonstrate that our approach achieves higher success rates and shorter completion times compared to existing methods. These results highlight the benefit of coupling belief inference, probing, and risk monitoring, yielding a principled and interpretable framework for planning under uncertainty.
