Characterizing Driver Interactions with Autonomous Vehicles via Response Maps

As automated vehicles (AVs) increasingly share roadways with human-driven vehicles (HDVs), understanding how pedestrians respond to different vehicle types in safety-critical interactions is essential for the safe deployment of automated driving technologies. This study extracts safety-critical pedestrian-vehicle interactions from the Argoverse 2 dataset to capture real-world crash avoidance behaviors in encounters involving AVs and HDVs. To model vehicle-type-specific pedestrian crash avoidance behavior, we develop a Smooth-Mamba Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient framework, termed SMamba-DDPG, which integrates smooth action constraints with efficient temporal representation learning. To quantify pedestrian behavioral differences, the framework trains separate crash avoidance policies for pedestrian interactions with AVs and HDVs. Results show that SMamba-DDPG outperforms baseline reinforcement learning and supervised learning models in reproducing pedestrian crash avoidance behaviors. Reconstructed trajectories demonstrate strong behavioral realism, accurately reproducing crash avoidance kinematics in both AV and HDV scenarios. Reaction time analysis shows that the model captures human-like response delays and reveals that pedestrians respond more quickly to AVs than to HDVs. Counterfactual analysis further indicates that pedestrians adopt lower crossing speeds when interacting with AVs. Large-scale safety analysis of model-generated data revealed that pedestrian-AV interactions consistently yielded lower conflict rates and higher pedestrian yielding rates compared to pedestrian-HDV interactions. The findings highlight the importance of incorporating vehicle-type-specific pedestrian behavioral models for safer automated driving system design and more realistic traffic simulations in mixed-traffic environments.

Mixed autonomy driving becomes unsafe and inefficient when autonomous vehicles (AVs) and human-driven vehicles (HVs) misread each other's intentions. We study this problem as implicit mutual communication in lane changes. The proposed framework models how the ego vehicle both expresses its intent and probes the other driver's preference under epistemic uncertainty. It combines a level-k Bayesian persuasion game with virtual features for proactive signaling, information-theoretic rewards for mutual communication, and adaptive weights of communication affordances. We further introduce the Pride-Inquiry (P-I) and Pride-Prejudice (P-P) planes to analyze communication intensity and tendency. The model is calibrated with a Communication-Based Multi-Agent Inverse Reinforcement Learning algorithm (C-MIRL) on the naturalistic NGSIM dataset. Compared with the non-communicative baseline, the proposed model reduces the prediction error of mandatory lane changes by up to 20% while maintaining strong generalization. Driver-In-the-Loop questionnaire scores are positively correlated with the calibrated communication variables, supporting the subjective validity of the model. The learned rewards further show that inquiry and listening affordances contribute more than pride and expression alone, and that inquiry preference varies more strongly across drivers. These results support explicit modeling of mutual communication and epistemic uncertainty in interactive driving.

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) are widely known to follow conservative, rule-based motion policies that surrounding drivers can learn to anticipate. A direct consequence is that human drivers may accept shorter longitudinal gaps when cutting in front of an AV than when targeting another human-driven vehicle (HDV). We test this hypothesis using the Waymo Open Motion Dataset (WOMD), which provides 25,906 real-world highway scenarios at 10 hertz. An eight-criterion lane-change detector extracts 706 HDV-to-AV and 3,172 HDV-to-HDV cut-in events from the same traffic environment. The median accepted gap in front of the Waymo AV is 7.58 meters versus 9.57 meters for HDV targets, a 1.99 meter reduction that is statistically significant (p equals 5.76 times 10 to the negative eighth power, d equals negative 0.224) and persists under speed-matched resampling. Cut-in speeds toward the AV are 37 percent higher (51.7 versus 37.7 kilometers per hour, d equals 0.502), and 68.0 percent of AV-targeted cut-ins occur below the 10 meter gap boundary versus 51.8 percent of HDV-targeted events (chi-squared equals 60.5, p is less than 10 to the negative thirteenth power). These results reveal a systematic and safety-relevant asymmetry in human gap-acceptance behavior that warrants AV-specific calibration of both motion-planning safety envelopes and traffic simulation models.