Current trajectory planning approaches mainly concentrate on geometric optimization and do not take vehicle nonlinear dynamics into full consideration. Infeasible lane-change trajectories may cause dynamic instability in critical situations, especially under low road frictions. This paper presents a dynamic-stability-aware lane-change planning method (DSA-LCP) formulated as an optimal control problem for automated vehicles. Trajectory smoothness, geometrical safety, and handling dynamics are integrated into the formulations of this planning method. Specifically, the road friction coefficient, which has crucial impacts on handling limitations, is deeply analyzed to within road adhesion capacity. Various test results including various road conditions and vehicle speeds are carried out, and the results validate the efficiency of the proposed DSA-LCP.
FengSYanXSunH, et al. Intelligent driving intelligence test for autonomous vehicles with naturalistic and adversarial environment. Nat Commun2021; 12(1): 748. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21007-8
3.
YanZYangKWangZ, et al. Intention-based lane changing and lane keeping haptic guidance steering system. IEEE Trans Intell Veh2021; 6(4): 622–633. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2020.3044180
4.
BevlyDCaoXGordonM, et al. Lane change and merge maneuvers for connected and automated vehicles: a survey. IEEE Trans Intell Veh2016; 1(1): 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2015.2503342
5.
ClaussmannLRevilloudMGruyerD, et al. A review of motion planning for highway autonomous driving. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2020; 21(5): 1826–1848. https://doi.org/10.1109/tits.2019.2913998
6.
KalaRWarwickK. Multi-level planning for semi-autonomous vehicles in traffic scenarios based on separation maximization. J Intell Robot Syst2013; 72(3): 559–590.
7.
LaValleSM. Rapidly-exploring random trees: a new tool for path planning. Technical Report No. 98–11. Iowa State University, 1998.
8.
NelsonW. Continuous-curvature paths for autonomous vehicles. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, Scottsdale, AZ, USA, 14–19 May 1989, pp.1260–1264. IEEE.
9.
ChenJZhaoPMeiT, et al. Lane change path planning based on piecewise Bezier curve for autonomous vehicle. In: Proceedings of 2013 IEEE international conference on vehicular electronics and safety, Dongguan, China, 2013, pp.17–22. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVES.2013.6619595
10.
HuangCLvCHangP, et al. Toward safe and personalized autonomous driving: decision-making and motion control with DPF and CDT techniques. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron2021; 26(2): 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1109/tmech.2021.3053248
11.
DongHZhuangWWuG, et al. Overtaking-enabled eco-approach control at signalized intersections for connected and automated vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2024; 25(5): 4527–4539. https://doi.org/10.1109/TITS.2023.3328022
12.
LengJSunCDongH, et al. Adaptive eco-driving with guided speed planning and lane changing through signalized intersections. IEEE Trans Transp Electrif2025; 11(3): 8365–8376. https://doi.org/10.1109/TTE.2025.3540057
13.
GeisslingerMPoszlerFLienkampM. An ethical trajectory planning algorithm for autonomous vehicles. Nat Mach Intell2023; 5, 137–144. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-022-00607-z
14.
ChenJZhanWTomizukaM. Autonomous driving motion planning with constrained iterative LQR. IEEE Trans Intell Veh2019; 4(2): 244–254. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2019.2904385
15.
ArrigoniSBraghinFCheliF. MPC trajectory planner for autonomous driving solved by genetic algorithm technique. Veh Syst Dyn2021; 60(12): 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2021.1999991
16.
JahanmahinOLinQPanY, et al. Jerk-minimized CILQR for human-like driving on two-lane roadway. In: 2021 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), Nagoya, Japan, 2021, pp.1282–1289. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IV48863.2021.9575938
17.
ZuoZYangXLiZ, et al. MPC-based cooperative control strategy of path planning and trajectory tracking for intelligent vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Veh2021; 6(3): 513–522. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIV.2020.3045837
18.
WangYLiuZZuoZ, et al. Trajectory planning and safety assessment of autonomous vehicles based on motion prediction and model predictive control. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2019; 68(9): 8546–8556. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2019.2930684
19.
TampuuASemikinMMuhammadN, et al. A survey of end-to-end driving: architectures and training methods. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst2022; 33(4): 1364–1384. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNNLS.2020.3043505
20.
YeFChengXWangP, et al. Automated lane change strategy using proximal policy optimization-based deep reinforcement learning. In: 2020 IEEE intelligent vehicles symposium (IV), Las Vegas, NV, USA, 2020, pp.1746–1752. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IV47402.2020.9304668
21.
CaiPSunYChenY, et al. Vision-based trajectory planning via imitation learning for autonomous vehicles. In: 2019 IEEE intelligent transportation systems conference (ITSC), Auckland, New Zealand, 2019, pp.2736–2742. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITSC.2019.8917149
22.
MazzilliVDe PintoSPascaliL, et al. Integrated chassis control: classification, analysis and future trends. Ann Rev Control2021; 51: 172–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arcontrol.2021.01.005
23.
ChengSHuBBWeiHL, et al. Deep learning-based hybrid dynamic modeling and improved handling stability assessment for autonomous vehicles at driving limits. IEEE Trans Veh Technol2024; 74(4): 5582–5593. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVT.2024.3515209
24.
GuoHYinZCaoD, et al. A review of estimation for vehicle tire-road interactions toward automated driving. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst2019; 49(1): 14–30. https://doi.org/10.1109/tsmc.2018.2819500
25.
YangDZhuLYangF, et al. Modeling and analysis of lateral driver behavior in lane-changing execution. Transp Res Record J Transp Res Board2015; 2490(1): 127–137. https://doi.org/10.3141/2490-14
