How Far Ahead Should Autonomous Vehicles Start Resolving Predicted Conflicts? Exploring Uncertainty-Based Safety-Efficiency Trade-Off

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.