{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015817223198594025, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.6608187134502925, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A Comparative Study of Different Objectives Functions for the Minimal Fuel Drive Cycle Optimization in Autonomous Vehicles

With the advent of self-driving autonomous vehicles, vehicle controllers are free to drive their own velocities. This feature can be exploited to drive an optimal velocity trajectory that minimizes fuel consumption. Two typical approaches to drive cycle optimization are velocity smoothing and tractive energy minimization. The former reduces accelerations and decelerations, and hence, it does not require information of vehicle parameters and resistance forces. On the other hand, the latter reduces tractive energy demand at the wheels of a vehicle. In this work, utilizing an experimentally validated full vehicle simulation software, we show that for conventional gasoline vehicles the lower energy velocity trajectory can consume as much fuel as the velocity smoothing case. This implies that the easily implementable, vehicle agnostic velocity smoothing optimization can be used for velocity optimization rather than the nonlinear tractive energy minimization, which results in a pulse-and-glide trajectory.