How to handle human driver complexity for AVs?

Since the modern age with the innovation of technologies and exploration of vehicle technology in a different segment. How far we as a human brain have been able to comprehend the social cues of the driving style of another driver? The question helps us to answer the paradigm of how far we are capable of programming such complex machines so that we can, utmost rely on it even during emergency situations.

One of the major concerns for AVs is to integrate the human intention of the other human drivers to understand and predict the circumstance in an interpretable way. As we are focusing on how the AVs can understand the other driver but in the practical world, it is not possible that everyone is with its own AVs so, we need to be careful enough that another driver is also able to interpret the moves an AV is taking to handle a trivial situation in heavy traffics. The social cues of selfishness and cooperation also need to be understood. Such as in a narrow road with cars parked on both the end, AV needs to understand the social cue of why the car from the other end slowed down and how to handle such interaction smoothly for a safe drive. Even there is a need to understand the driver’s personality and also let the drive understand your social cues in a humanely possible.

The communication is done explicitly with state machines, geometric reasoning about the driving interactions, game theory is used to capture such dynamic interactions between agents to consider the best response of an agent with respect to the decisions. In other research work, AV’s ability is being extended where the estimation of other driver’s personalities is incorporated with different driving styles. Through this approach complex navigation scenarios are handled at an intersection where the mathematical formulation is combined with control-theoretic approaches with models and metrics from behavioral game theory, literature psychology, and machine learning.

In my opinion, emphasis on understanding social cues from both the end is very much needed. As we are introducing new concepts and expecting it to be accepted by the general mass of people, why not concentrate on making it easier even for the other party to understand the social cues of AVs as they are responding as humanly as possible.  Do you think a complete change in driving style is needed for AVs to operate as autonomously as possible or AVs need to be programmed to understand the social norms used while driving on empty traffic, heavy traffic, or uncertain situations with different personalities?

Source:- C. G. McClintock, S. T. Allison, Social value orientation and helping behavior. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 19, 353–362 (1989); P. A. Van Lange, The pursuit of joint outcomes and equality in outcomes: An integrative model of social value orientation. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 77, 337–349 (1999); T. Ga¨ rling, S. Fujii, A. Ga¨ rling, C. Jakobsson, Moderating effects of social value orientation on determinants of proenvironmental behavior intention. J. Environ. Psychol. 23, 1–9 (2003); P. A. Van Lange, R. Bekkers, T. N. Schuyt, M. V. Vugt, From games to giving: Social value orientation predicts donations to noble causes. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 29, 375–384 (2007); J. D’Attoma, C. Volintiru, A. Malezieux, Gender, social value orientation, and tax compliance (CESifo Working Paper 7372, CESifo, Munich, 2018).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.