Much research in artificial intelligence is concerned with the development of autonomous agents that can interact effectively with other agents. An important aspect of such agents is the ability to reason about the behaviours of other agents, by constructing models which make predictions about various properties of interest (such as actions, goals, beliefs) of the modelled agents. A variety of modelling approaches now exist which vary widely in their methodology and underlying assumptions, catering to the needs of the different sub-communities within which they were developed and reflecting the different practical uses for which they are intended. The purpose of the present article is to provide a comprehensive survey of the salient modelling methods which can be found in the literature. The article concludes with a discussion of open problems which may form the basis for fruitful future research.

No abstract

We propose an integrated prediction and planning system for autonomous driving which uses rational inverse planning to recognise the goals of other vehicles. Goal recognition informs a Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) algorithm to plan optimal maneuvers for the ego vehicle. Inverse planning and MCTS utilise a shared set of defined maneuvers and macro actions to construct plans which are explainable by means of rationality principles. Evaluation in simulations of urban driving scenarios demonstrate the system's ability to robustly recognise the goals of other vehicles, enabling our vehicle to exploit non-trivial opportunities to significantly reduce driving times. In each scenario, we extract intuitive explanations for the predictions which justify the system's decisions.• A method for goal recognition and multi-modal trajectory prediction via rational inverse planning.

Recent road trials have shown that guaranteeing the safety of driving decisions is essential for the wider adoption of autonomous vehicle technology. One promising direction is to pose safety requirements as planning constraints in nonlinear, non-convex optimization problems of motion synthesis. However, many implementations of this approach are limited by uncertain convergence and local optimality of the solutions achieved, affecting overall robustness. To improve upon these issues, we propose a novel two-stage optimization framework: in the first stage, we find a solution to a Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) formulation of the motion synthesis problem, the output of which initializes a second Nonlinear Programming (NLP) stage. The MILP stage enforces hard constraints of safety and road rule compliance generating a solution in the right subspace, while the NLP stage refines the solution within the safety bounds for feasibility and smoothness. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework via simulated experiments of complex urban driving scenarios, outperforming a state-of-the-art baseline in metrics of convergence, comfort and progress.

There is a long history in game theory on the topic of Bayesian or "rational" learning, in which each player maintains beliefs over a set of alternative behaviours, or types, for the other players. This idea has gained increasing interest in the artificial intelligence (AI) community, where it is used as a method to control a single agent in a system composed of multiple agents with unknown behaviours. The idea is to hypothesise a set of types, each specifying a possible behaviour for the other agents, and to plan our own actions with respect to those types which we believe are most likely, given the observed actions of the agents. The game theory literature studies this idea primarily in the context of equilibrium attainment. In contrast, many AI applications have a focus on task completion and payoff maximisation. With this perspective in mind, we identify and address a spectrum of questions pertaining to belief and truth in hypothesised types. We formulate three basic ways to incorporate evidence into posterior beliefs and show when the resulting beliefs are correct, and when they may fail to be correct. Moreover, we demonstrate that prior beliefs can have a significant impact on our ability to maximise payoffs in the long-term, and that they can be computed automatically with consistent performance effects. Furthermore, we analyse the conditions under which we are able complete our task optimally, despite inaccuracies in the hypothesised types. Finally, we show how the correctness of hypothesised types can be ascertained during the interaction via an automated statistical analysis.