Integrating Automated Vehicles (AVs) into existing traffic systems holds the promise of enhanced road safety, reduced congestion, and more sustainable travel. Effective integration of AVs requires understanding the interactions between AVs and Human-driving Vehicles (HVs), especially during the transition period in which AVs and HVs coexist in a mixed traffic environment. Numerous recent empirical studies find reduced headways of human drivers following an AV compared to following an HV, and attribute this reduction to behavioural changes of drivers when they follow AVs. However, more factors may be at play due to the inherent inconsistencies between the comparison conditions of HV-following-AV and HV-following-HV. This study scrutinises three alternative explanations for the observed reduction in headways: (1) systematic differences in car-following states during data collection, (2) systematic differences in driving variability between leading AVs and HVs, and (3) systematic differences in driving characteristics of leading AVs versus HVs. We use a large-scale dataset extracted from Lyft AV motion data and examine each of these explanations through data stratification and simulation. Our results show that all three mechanisms contribute to the observed reduction in headways of human drivers following AVs. In addition, our findings highlight the importance of driving homogeneity and stability in achieving reliably shorter headways. Thereby, this study offers a more comprehensive understanding on the difference between HV–AV and HV–HV interactions in mixed traffic, and is expected to promote more effective integration of AVs into human traffic.

With the increased deployment of autonomous vehicles (AVs) in mixed traffic flow, ensuring safe and efficient interactions between AVs and human road users is important. In urban environments, intersections have various conflicts that can greatly affect driving safety and traffic efficiency. This study uses road test data to examine the possible safety and efficiency impacts of intersection conflict resolution involving AVs. The contribution comprises two main aspects. Firstly. we prepare and open a high-quality lateral conflict resolution dataset derived from the Argoverse-2 data, specifically targeting urban intersections. A rigorous data processing pipeline is applied to extract pertinent scenarios, rectify anomalies, enhance data quality, and annotate conflict regimes. This effort yields 5000+ AV-involved and 16000 AV-free cases, covering rich conflict regimes and balanced traffic states. Secondly, we employ surrogate safety measures to assess the safety impact of AVs on human-driven vehicles (HVs) and pedestrians. In addition, a novel concept of Minimum Recurrent Clearance Time (MRCT) is proposed to quantify the traffic efficiency impacts of AVs during conflict resolution. The results show that, for AV–HV and HV–HV conflict resolution processes, the differences in selected safety and efficiency measures for human drivers are statistically insignificant. In contrast, pedestrians demonstrate diverse behaviour adjustments. Some pedestrians behave more conservatively when interacting with AVs than with HVs. Notably, the efficiency of AV-involved conflict resolution is significantly lower than in AV-free instances due to the conservative driving style of AVs. This efficiency gap is particularly large when AVs pass through the conflict point after human drivers in unprotected left turns. These observations offer a perspective on how AVs potentially affect the safety and efficiency of mixed traffic. The processed dataset is openly available via https://github.com/RomainLITUD/conflict_resolution_dataset.

Resolving predicted conflicts is vital for safe and efficient autonomous vehicles (AV). In practice, vehicular motion prediction faces inherent uncertainty due to heterogeneous driving behaviours and environments. This spatial uncertainty increases non-linearly with prediction time horizons, leading AVs to perceive more road space occupied by conflicting vehicles. Reacting early to resolve predicted conflicts can ensure safety but may adversely affect traffic efficiency. Therefore, determining how far ahead AVs should start resolving predicted conflicts based on safety and traffic efficiency constraints is crucial. To answer this question, this study proposes a novel approach to explore the trade-off between safety and traffic efficiency considering prediction uncertainty. Firstly, a continuous-time motion prediction framework is proposed for estimating the spatial probability distribution of a vehicle’s future position at any moment within the maximum time horizon. Subsequently, average driver space and the corresponding traffic flow are derived from the safety settings of AV and prediction uncertainty. As such, the safety-efficiency trade-off can be quantified. Experiments show that mandatory decision points, high speeds, and traffic state transitions usually cause fast-increasing prediction uncertainty. A case study of Intelligent Driver Models (IDM) shows that traffic efficiency drops rapidly when AVs resolve predicted conflicts longer than 1.5 seconds ahead. AVs can act earlier on motorways for efficiency concerns but must be myopic at urban intersections. Prediction uncertainty fundamentally constrains the safety-efficiency performance of AVs. These findings are instructive for designing traffic-compatible AVs.

Predicting the trajectories of road agents is fundamental for self-driving cars. Trajectory prediction contains many sources of uncertainty in data and modelling. A thorough understanding of this uncertainty is crucial in a safety-critical task like auto-piloting a vehicle. In practice, it is necessary to distinguish between the uncertainty caused by partial observability of all factors that may affect a driver's near-future decisions, the so-called aleatoric uncertainty, and the uncertainty of deploying a model in new scenarios that are possibly not present in the training set, the so-called epistemic uncertainty. They reflect the trade-off between data collection and model improvement In this paper, we propose a new framework to systematically quantify both sources of uncertainty. Specifically, to approximate the spatial distribution of an agent's future position, we propose a 2D histogram-based deep learning model combined with deep ensemble techniques for measuring aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty by entropy-based quantities. The proposed Uncertainty Quantification Network (UQnet) employs a causal part to enhance its generalizability so rare driving behaviours can be effectively identified. Experiments on the INTERACTION dataset show that UQnet is able to give more robust predictions in generalizability tests compared to the correlation-based models. Further analysis presents that high aleatoric uncertainty cases are mainly caused by heterogeneous driving behaviours and unknown intended directions. Based on this aleatoric uncertainty component, we estimate the lower bounds of mean-square-error and final-displacement-error as indicators for the predictability of trajectories. Furthermore, the analysis of epistemic uncertainty illustrates that domain knowledge of speed-dependent driving behaviour is essential for adapting a model from low-speed to high-speed situations. Our paper contributes to motion forecasting with a new framework, that recasts the problem of accuracy improvement in a way that focuses on differentiating between unpredictable components and rare cases for which more and different data should be collected.