Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
To address the ‘mechanical’ return to original lane and similar non-humanized lane-changing issues that may occur in existing intelligent driving systems after completing overtaking maneuvers, this study proposes a humanized lane-changing decision method that incorporates driving style characteristics. First, based on the NGSIM dataset, we employ cluster analysis to systematically dissect human drivers’ lane-changing behavior patterns, laying the theoretical foundation for constructing a human-like decision framework. Second, a game model is established to precisely represent diverse driving styles by adjusting the weights of safety, efficiency, and comfort objectives. A reference line dynamic switching mechanism is then proposed to optimize lane-change paths by integrating vehicle speed and safety distance. Joint simulation results demonstrate superiority over dynamic programming (DP) methods in multiple aspects: under conservative driving mode, dual safety thresholds for following distance and speed significantly enhance safety and reliability. In general driving mode, driving stability and smoothness improved by 2.64% and 75.28%, respectively; in aggressive driving mode, lane-change speed increased by 7.06%. These improvements demonstrate that the human-like lane-changing strategy can autonomously achieve the optimal dynamic balance between safety, comfort, and efficiency tailored to different driving styles, providing an effective pathway for constructing high-performance autonomous driving decision systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: