SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Arkady Zgonnikov

Publications and source records attributed to Arkady Zgonnikov.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Clustered Randomized Smoothing for Stochastic Prediction Functions

Modern stochastic predictors can model rich, multi-modal outcome distributions. However, this expressive power comes with challenges in ensuring robust predictions $-$ a critical requirement in safety-critical domains. Randomized smoothing is a leading technique for improving robustness, particularly against adversarial perturbations. Yet, in stochastic multi-modal regression settings, randomized smoothing often fails due to mode collapse, yielding averaged predictions that do not reflect the underlying distribution. To address this limitation, we propose clustered $\alpha$-smoothing, a framework that (1) partitions noisy samples using an arbitrary clustering algorithm, (2) applies $\alpha$-smoothing locally within each cluster, and (3) combines the resulting predictions into a mixture distribution. By interpreting the smoothing distribution as a mixture of $\alpha$-smoothers, we derive a lower bound on the probability that the smoothed prediction lies within a union of compact regions corresponding to distinct modes. We empirically evaluate our framework on two benchmarks, demonstrating substantial improvements over state-of-the-art methods. In stochastic trajectory prediction on a driving simulator dataset, our approach achieves, on average, a $27\%$ lower Wasserstein distance to the ground-truth distribution compared to $\alpha$-smoothing. In quadrotor control, where modes correspond to distinct feasible paths to a target, our method reduces the collision rate by $81\%$ relative to the state-of-the-art randomized smoothing.

cs.LG

Emotion in an active inference model of human driving

Active inference has emerged as a principled framework for modeling adaptive behavior by balancing goal-directed action with uncertainty reduction. It has been successfully applied across biological and artificial systems, including recent work on human driving. However, existing active inference models of driving have yet to address an important determinant of behavior in traffic: affective state, which significantly influences decision-making. Prior work in non-traffic domains has explored active inference agents in which emotions are represented along the axes of valence and arousal in the circumplex model. However, this work has been limited to simplified settings with discrete state spaces. In this work, we propose an expanded formulation of valence and arousal that can be extracted from a more complex active inference model of driving with continuous states. In particular, we condition affective estimates not only on the current state but also on predicted future outcomes. We evaluate the proposed approach in two interactive driving scenarios and show that the resulting emotion signals correspond to affective patterns reported in similar scenarios.

cs.AI

Knowing When to Move: Evidence Accumulation Models of Human Behavior in Traffic

Evidence accumulation models provide a formal framework for studying decision making as a dynamic process unfolding over time. While these models have been extensively developed and reviewed in laboratory paradigms, their structured application in complex, ecologically valid domains has received comparatively little attention. Road traffic is a particularly relevant context for studying sustained, embodied perception action behavior, where decisions unfold under time pressure and involve continuous control and ongoing perception-action coupling. Examining how EAMs have been applied in this domain may therefore offer insights beyond discrete laboratory tasks toward decision making in real-world behavior. This semi-systematic review synthesizes 28 studies (2014-2026) applying EAMs to traffic-related behavior. We organize the literature along two dimensions: 1) modelling level, distinguishing models at the level of discrete decision-making and models at the level of continuous action control, and 2) model architecture, distinguishing evidence accumulation as either a stand-alone decision model or an embedded component within broader perception-action or interaction frameworks. These distinctions are associated with systematic differences in model architecture, parameterization, data usage, and validation strategies, reflecting task specific demands. By providing a structured overview of these patterns, this review clarifies how EAMs are currently instantiated in traffic contexts and highlights methodological challenges and future directions both in traffic modelling and in modelling of decision-making more broadly. Promising directions include laboratory work on evidence accumulation in sustained and time-varying tasks, interactive multi-individual decision-making, and the use of neurophysiological measures to identify the perceptual evidence underlying complex perception-action behavior.

cs.HC

Linking Behaviour and Perception to Evaluate Meaningful Human Control over Partially Automated Driving

Partial driving automation creates a tension: drivers remain legally responsible for vehicle behaviour, yet their active control is significantly reduced. This reduction undermines the engagement and sense of agency needed to intervene safely. Meaningful human control (MHC) has been proposed as a normative framework to address this tension. However, empirical methods for evaluating whether existing systems actually provide MHC remain underdeveloped. In this study, we investigated the extent to which drivers experience MHC when interacting with partially automated driving systems. Twenty-four drivers completed a simulator study involving silent automation failures under two modes - haptic shared control (HSC) and traded control (TC). We derived behavioural metrics from telemetry data, subjective perception scores from post-trial surveys and used them to test hypothesised relations between them derived from the properties of systems under MHC. The confirmatory analysis showed a significant negative correlation between the perception of the automated vehicle (AV) understanding the driver and conflict in steering torques. An exploratory analysis also revealed a surprising positive correlation between reaction times and the perception of sufficient control. Qualitative feedback from open-ended post-experiment questionnaires revealed that mismatches in intentions between the driver and automation, lack of safety, and resistance to driver inputs contribute to the reduction of perceived MHC, while subtle haptic guidance aligned with driver intent had a positive effect. These findings suggest that future designs should prioritise effortless driver interventions, transparent communication of automation intent, and context-sensitive authority allocation to strengthen meaningful human control in partially automated driving.

cs.HC

Resolving space-sharing conflicts in road user interactions through uncertainty reduction: An active inference-based computational model

Understanding how road users resolve space-sharing conflicts is important both for traffic safety and the safe deployment of autonomous vehicles. While existing models have captured specific aspects of such interactions (e.g., explicit communication), a theoretically-grounded computational framework has been lacking. In this paper, we extend a previously developed active inference-based driver behavior model to simulate interactive behavior of two agents. Our model captures three complementary mechanisms for uncertainty reduction in interaction: (i) implicit communication via direct behavioral coupling, (ii) reliance on normative expectations (stop signs, priority rules, etc.), and (iii) explicit communication. In a simplified intersection scenario, we show that normative and explicit communication cues can increase the likelihood of a successful conflict resolution. However, this relies on agents acting as expected. In situations where another agent (intentionally or unintentionally) violates normative expectations or communicates misleading information, reliance on these cues may induce collisions. These findings illustrate how active inference can provide a novel framework for modeling road user interactions which is also applicable in other fields.

cs.AI

Evaluating randomized smoothing as a defense against adversarial attacks in trajectory prediction

Accurate and robust trajectory prediction is essential for safe and efficient autonomous driving, yet recent work has shown that even state-of-the-art prediction models are highly vulnerable to inputs being mildly perturbed by adversarial attacks. Although model vulnerabilities to such attacks have been studied, work on effective countermeasures remains limited. In this work, we develop and evaluate a new defense mechanism for trajectory prediction models based on randomized smoothing -- an approach previously applied successfully in other domains. We evaluate its ability to improve model robustness through a series of experiments that test different strategies of randomized smoothing. We show that our approach can consistently improve prediction robustness of multiple base trajectory prediction models in various datasets without compromising accuracy in non-adversarial settings. Our results demonstrate that randomized smoothing offers a simple and computationally inexpensive technique for mitigating adversarial attacks in trajectory prediction.

cs.LG

General-purpose LLMs as Models of Human Driver Behavior: The Case of Simplified Merging

Human behavior models are essential as behavior references and for simulating human agents in virtual safety assessment of automated vehicles (AVs), yet current models face a trade-off between interpretability and flexibility. General-purpose large language models (LLMs) offer a promising alternative: a single model potentially deployable without parameter fitting across diverse scenarios. However, what LLMs can and cannot capture about human driving behavior remains poorly understood. We address this gap by embedding two general-purpose LLMs (OpenAI o3 and Google Gemini 2.5 Pro) as standalone, closed-loop driver agents in a simplified one-dimensional merging scenario and comparing their behavior against human data using quantitative and qualitative analyses. Both models reproduce human-like intermittent operational control and tactical dependencies on spatial cues. However, neither consistently captures the human response to dynamic velocity cues, and safety performance diverges sharply between models. A systematic prompt ablation study reveals that prompt components act as model-specific inductive biases that do not transfer across LLMs. These findings suggest that general-purpose LLMs could potentially serve as standalone, ready-to-use human behavior models in AV evaluation pipelines, but future research is needed to better understand their failure modes and ensure their validity as models of human driving behavior.

cs.AI

Using Feasible Action-Space Reduction by Groups to fill Causal Responsibility Gaps in Spatial Interactions

Heralding the advent of autonomous vehicles and mobile robots that interact with humans, responsibility in spatial interaction is burgeoning as a research topic. Even though metrics of responsibility tailored to spatial interactions have been proposed, they are mostly focused on the responsibility of individual agents. Metrics of causal responsibility focusing on individuals fail in cases of causal overdeterminism - when many actors simultaneously cause an outcome. To fill the gaps in causal responsibility left by individual-focused metrics, we formulate a metric for the causal responsibility of groups. To identify assertive agents that are causally responsible for the trajectory of an affected agent, we further formalise the types of assertive influences and propose a tiering algorithm for systematically identifying assertive agents. Finally, we use scenario-based simulations to illustrate the benefits of considering groups and how the emergence of group effects vary with interaction dynamics and the proximity of agents.

cs.MA

CARE Drive A Framework for Evaluating Reason-Responsiveness of Vision Language Models in Automated Driving

Foundation models, including vision language models, are increasingly used in automated driving to interpret scenes, recommend actions, and generate natural language explanations. However, existing evaluation methods primarily assess outcome based performance, such as safety and trajectory accuracy, without determining whether model decisions reflect human relevant considerations. As a result, it remains unclear whether explanations produced by such models correspond to genuine reason responsive decision making or merely post hoc rationalizations. This limitation is especially significant in safety critical domains because it can create false confidence. To address this gap, we propose CARE Drive, Context Aware Reasons Evaluation for Driving, a model agnostic framework for evaluating reason responsiveness in vision language models applied to automated driving. CARE Drive compares baseline and reason augmented model decisions under controlled contextual variation to assess whether human reasons causally influence decision behavior. The framework employs a two stage evaluation process. Prompt calibration ensures stable outputs. Systematic contextual perturbation then measures decision sensitivity to human reasons such as safety margins, social pressure, and efficiency constraints. We demonstrate CARE Drive in a cyclist overtaking scenario involving competing normative considerations. Results show that explicit human reasons significantly influence model decisions, improving alignment with expert recommended behavior. However, responsiveness varies across contextual factors, indicating uneven sensitivity to different types of reasons. These findings provide empirical evidence that reason responsiveness in foundation models can be systematically evaluated without modifying model parameters.

cs.AI

Controllable Generative Trajectory Prediction via Weak Preference Alignment

Deep generative models such as conditional variational autoencoders (CVAEs) have shown great promise for predicting trajectories of surrounding agents in autonomous vehicle planning. State-of-the-art models have achieved remarkable accuracy in such prediction tasks. Besides accuracy, diversity is also crucial for safe planning because human behaviors are inherently uncertain and multimodal. However, existing methods generally lack a scheme to generate controllably diverse trajectories, which is arguably more useful than randomly diversified trajectories, to the end of safe planning. To address this, we propose PrefCVAE, an augmented CVAE framework that uses weakly labeled preference pairs to imbue latent variables with semantic attributes. Using average velocity as an example attribute, we demonstrate that PrefCVAE enables controllable, semantically meaningful predictions without degrading baseline accuracy. Our results show the effectiveness of preference supervision as a cost-effective way to enhance sampling-based generative models.

cs.RO

STEP: Structured Training and Evaluation Platform for benchmarking trajectory prediction models

While trajectory prediction plays a critical role in enabling safe and effective path-planning in automated vehicles, standardized practices for evaluating such models remain underdeveloped. Recent efforts have aimed to unify dataset formats and model interfaces for easier comparisons, yet existing frameworks often fall short in supporting heterogeneous traffic scenarios, joint prediction models, or user documentation. In this work, we introduce STEP -- a new benchmarking framework that addresses these limitations by providing a unified interface for multiple datasets, enforcing consistent training and evaluation conditions, and supporting a wide range of prediction models. We demonstrate the capabilities of STEP in a number of experiments which reveal 1) the limitations of widely-used testing procedures, 2) the importance of joint modeling of agents for better predictions of interactions, and 3) the vulnerability of current state-of-the-art models against both distribution shifts and targeted attacks by adversarial agents. With STEP, we aim to shift the focus from the ``leaderboard'' approach to deeper insights about model behavior and generalization in complex multi-agent settings.

cs.LG

Towards Human-Centric Evaluation of Interaction-Aware Automated Vehicle Controllers: A Framework and Case Study

As automated vehicles (AVs) increasingly integrate into mixed-traffic environments, evaluating their interaction with human-driven vehicles (HDVs) becomes critical. In most research focused on developing new AV control algorithms (controllers), the performance of these algorithms is assessed solely based on performance metrics such as collision avoidance or lane-keeping efficiency, while largely overlooking the human-centred dimensions of interaction with HDVs. This paper proposes a structured evaluation framework that addresses this gap by incorporating metrics grounded in the human-robot interaction literature. The framework spans four key domains: a) interaction effect, b) interaction perception, c) interaction effort, and d) interaction ability. These domains capture both the performance of the AV and its impact on human drivers around it. To demonstrate the utility of the framework, we apply it to a case study evaluating how a state-of-the-art AV controller interacts with human drivers in a merging scenario in a driving simulator. Measuring HDV-HDV interactions as a baseline, this study included one representative metric per domain: a) perceived safety, b) subjective ratings, specifically how participants perceived the other vehicle's driving behaviour (e.g., aggressiveness or predictability) , c) driver workload, and d) merging success. The results showed that incorporating metrics covering all four domains in the evaluation of AV controllers can illuminate critical differences in driver experience when interacting with AVs. This highlights the need for a more comprehensive evaluation approach. Our framework offers researchers, developers, and policymakers a systematic method for assessing AV behaviour beyond technical performance, fostering the development of AVs that are not only functionally capable but also understandable, acceptable, and safe from a human perspective.

cs.HC

A Framework for Ethical Decision-Making in Automated Vehicles through Human Reasons-based Supervision

Ethical dilemmas are a common challenge in everyday driving, requiring human drivers to balance competing priorities such as safety, efficiency, and rule compliance. However, much of the existing research in automated vehicles (AVs) has focused on high-stakes "trolley problems," which involve extreme and rare situations. Such scenarios, though rich in ethical implications, are rarely applicable in real-world AV decision-making. In practice, when AVs confront everyday ethical dilemmas, they often appear to prioritise strict adherence to traffic rules. By contrast, human drivers may bend the rules in context-specific situations, using judgement informed by practical concerns such as safety and efficiency. According to the concept of meaningful human control, AVs should respond to human reasons, including those of drivers, vulnerable road users, and policymakers. This work introduces a novel human reasons-based supervision framework that detects when AV behaviour misaligns with expected human reasons to trigger trajectory reconsideration. The framework integrates with motion planning and control systems to support real-time adaptation, enabling decisions that better reflect safety, efficiency, and regulatory considerations. Simulation results demonstrate that this approach could help AVs respond more effectively to ethical challenges in dynamic driving environments by prompting replanning when the current trajectory fails to align with human reasons. These findings suggest that our approach offers a path toward more adaptable, human-centered decision-making in AVs.

eess.SY

A Framework for Human-Reason-Aligned Trajectory Evaluation in Automated Vehicles

One major challenge for the adoption and acceptance of automated vehicles (AVs) is ensuring that they can make sound decisions in everyday situations that involve ethical tension. Much attention has focused on rare, high-stakes dilemmas such as trolley problems. Yet similar conflicts arise in routine driving when human considerations, such as legality, efficiency, and comfort, come into conflict. Current AV planning systems typically rely on rigid rules, which struggle to balance these competing considerations and often lead to behaviour that misaligns with human expectations. This paper introduces a reasons-based trajectory evaluation framework that operationalises the tracking condition of Meaningful Human Control (MHC). The framework represents human agents reasons (e.g., regulatory compliance) as quantifiable functions and evaluates how well candidate trajectories align with them. It assigns adjustable weights to agent priorities and includes a balance function to discourage excluding any agent. To demonstrate the approach, we use a real-world-inspired overtaking scenario, which highlights tensions between compliance, efficiency, and comfort. Our results show that different trajectories emerge as preferable depending on how agents reasons are weighted, and small shifts in priorities can lead to discrete changes in the selected action. This demonstrates that everyday ethical decisions in AV driving are highly sensitive to the weights assigned to the reasons of different human agents.

cs.RO

How Much Is Too Much? Adaptive, Context-Aware Risk Detection in Naturalistic Driving

Reliable risk identification based on driver behavior data underpins real-time safety feedback, fleet risk management, and evaluation of driver-assist systems. While naturalistic driving studies have become foundational for providing real-world driver behavior data, the existing frameworks for identifying risk based on such data have two fundamental limitations: (i) they rely on predefined time windows and fixed thresholds to disentangle risky and normal driving behavior, and (ii) they assume behavior is stationary across drivers and time, ignoring heterogeneity and temporal drift. In practice, these limitations can lead to timing errors and miscalibration in alerts, weak generalization to new drivers/routes/conditions, and higher false-alarm and miss rates, undermining driver trust and reducing safety intervention effectiveness. To address this gap, we propose a unified, context-aware framework that adapts labels and models over time and across drivers via rolling windows, joint optimization, dynamic calibration, and model fusion, tailored for time-stamped kinematic data. The framework is tested using two safety indicators, speed-weighted headway and harsh driving events, and three models: Random Forest, XGBoost, and Deep Neural Network (DNN). Speed-weighted headway yielded more stable and context-sensitive classifications than harsh-event counts. XGBoost maintained consistent performance under changing thresholds, whereas DNN achieved higher recall at lower thresholds but with greater variability across trials. The ensemble aggregated signals from multiple models into a single risk decision, balancing responsiveness to risky behavior with control of false alerts. Overall, the framework shows promise for adaptive, context-aware risk detection that can enhance real-time safety feedback and support driver-focused interventions in intelligent transportation systems.

cs.LG

Principles and Reasons Behind Automated Vehicle Decisions in Ethically Ambiguous Everyday Scenarios

Automated vehicles (AVs) increasingly encounter ethically ambiguous situations in everyday driving--scenarios involving conflicting human interests and lacking clearly optimal courses of action. While existing ethical models often focus on rare, high-stakes dilemmas (e.g., crash avoidance or trolley problems), routine decisions such as overtaking cyclists or navigating social interactions remain underexplored. This study addresses that gap by applying the tracking condition of Meaningful Human Control (MHC), which holds that AV behaviour should align with human reasons--defined as the values, intentions, and expectations that justify actions. We conducted qualitative interviews with 18 AV experts to identify the types of reasons that should inform AV manoeuvre planning. Thirteen categories of reasons emerged, organised across normative, strategic, tactical, and operational levels, and linked to the roles of relevant human agents. A case study on cyclist overtaking illustrates how these reasons interact in context, revealing a consistent prioritisation of safety, contextual flexibility regarding regulatory compliance, and nuanced trade-offs involving efficiency, comfort, and public acceptance. Based on these insights, we propose a principled conceptual framework for AV decision-making in routine, ethically ambiguous scenarios. The framework supports dynamic, human-aligned behaviour by prioritising safety, allowing pragmatic actions when strict legal adherence would undermine key values, and enabling constrained deviations when appropriately justified. This empirically grounded approach advances current guidance by offering actionable, context-sensitive design principles for ethically aligned AV systems.

cs.CY

Active inference as a unified model of collision avoidance behavior in human drivers

Collision avoidance -- involving a rapid threat detection and quick execution of the appropriate evasive maneuver -- is a critical aspect of driving. However, existing models of human collision avoidance behavior are fragmented, focusing on specific scenarios or only describing certain aspects of the avoidance behavior, such as response times. This paper addresses these gaps by proposing a novel computational cognitive model of human collision avoidance behavior based on active inference. Active inference provides a unified approach to modeling human behavior: the minimization of free energy. Building on prior active inference work, our model incorporates established cognitive mechanisms such as evidence accumulation to simulate human responses in two distinct collision avoidance scenarios: front-to-rear lead vehicle braking and lateral incursion by an oncoming vehicle. We demonstrate that our model explains a wide range of previous empirical findings on human collision avoidance behavior. Specifically, the model closely reproduces both aggregate results from meta-analyses previously reported in the literature and detailed, scenario-specific effects observed in a recent driving simulator study, including response timing, maneuver selection, and execution. Our results highlight the potential of active inference as a unified framework for understanding and modeling human behavior in complex real-life driving tasks.

cs.RO

Feasible Action Space Reduction for Quantifying Causal Responsibility in Continuous Spatial Interactions

Understanding the causal influence of one agent on another agent is crucial for safely deploying artificially intelligent systems such as automated vehicles and mobile robots into human-inhabited environments. Existing models of causal responsibility deal with simplified abstractions of scenarios with discrete actions, thus, limiting real-world use when understanding responsibility in spatial interactions. Based on the assumption that spatially interacting agents are embedded in a scene and must follow an action at each instant, Feasible Action-Space Reduction (FeAR) was proposed as a metric for causal responsibility in a grid-world setting with discrete actions.Since real-world interactions involve continuous action spaces, this paper proposes a formulation of the FeAR metric for measuring causal responsibility in space-continuous interactions. We illustrate the utility of the metric in prototypical space-sharing conflicts, and showcase its applications for analysing backward-looking responsibility and in estimating forward-looking responsibility to guide agent decision making. Our results highlight the potential of the FeAR metric for designing and engineering artificial agents, as well as for assessing the responsibility of agents around humans.

cs.MA