Hamza El Alaoui

h-index4
2papers
74citations

2 Papers

3.6ROSep 30, 2023
Deep Reinforcement Learning for Autonomous Vehicle Intersection Navigation

Badr Ben Elallid, Hamza El Alaoui, Nabil Benamar · cmu

In this paper, we explore the challenges associated with navigating complex T-intersections in dense traffic scenarios for autonomous vehicles (AVs). Reinforcement learning algorithms have emerged as a promising approach to address these challenges by enabling AVs to make safe and efficient decisions in real-time. Here, we address the problem of efficiently and safely navigating T-intersections using a lower-cost, single-agent approach based on the Twin Delayed Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (TD3) reinforcement learning algorithm. We show that our TD3-based method, when trained and tested in the CARLA simulation platform, demonstrates stable convergence and improved safety performance in various traffic densities. Our results reveal that the proposed approach enables the AV to effectively navigate T-intersections, outperforming previous methods in terms of travel delays, collision minimization, and overall cost. This study contributes to the growing body of knowledge on reinforcement learning applications in autonomous driving and highlights the potential of single-agent, cost-effective methods for addressing more complex driving scenarios and advancing reinforcement learning algorithms in the future.

11.7HCMar 11
"I followed what felt right, not what I was told": Autonomy, Coaching, and Recognizing Bias Through AI-Mediated Dialogue

Atieh Taheri, Hamza El Alaoui, Patrick Carrington et al.

Ableist microaggressions remain pervasive in everyday interactions, yet interventions to help people recognize them are limited. We present an experiment testing how AI-mediated dialogue influences recognition of ableism. 160 participants completed a pre-test, intervention, and a post-test across four conditions: AI nudges toward bias (Bias-Directed), inclusion (Neutral-Directed), unguided dialogue (Self-Directed), and a text-only non-dialogue (Reading). Participants rated scenarios on standardness of social experience and emotional impact; those in dialogue-based conditions also provided qualitative reflections. Quantitative results showed dialogue-based conditions produced stronger recognition than Reading, though trajectories diverged: biased nudges improved differentiation of bias from neutrality but increased overall negativity. Inclusive or no nudges remained more balanced, while Reading participants showed weaker gains and even declines. Qualitative findings revealed biased nudges were often rejected, while inclusive nudges were adopted as scaffolding. We contribute a validated vignette corpus, an AI-mediated intervention platform, and design implications highlighting trade-offs conversational systems face when integrating bias-related nudges.