Multi-Target Maneuver Coordinations: Unlocking Coordination Opportunities in Connected Automated Driving

Javier Gozalvez; Miguel Sepulcre; Onur Altintas; Rafael Molina-Masegosa; Sergei S. Avedisov; Takayuki Shimizu

arxiv: 2606.22055 · v1 · pith:AYJCPRCJnew · submitted 2026-06-20 · 💻 cs.NI · cs.RO

Multi-Target Maneuver Coordinations: Unlocking Coordination Opportunities in Connected Automated Driving

Rafael Molina-Masegosa , Sergei S. Avedisov , Miguel Sepulcre , Takayuki Shimizu , Javier Gozalvez , Onur Altintas This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 11:13 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.NI cs.RO

keywords maneuver coordinationconnected automated drivingmulti-target selectioncooperative maneuversdecision-making extensionvehicle negotiation

0 comments

The pith

Extending decision-making to multiple target vehicles increases triggered and executed maneuver coordinations without changing protocols or raising computational cost.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Existing maneuver coordination limits each vehicle to one predefined target. The paper extends only the decision-making step before coordination to let a vehicle scan and choose among several feasible targets. This produces more triggered and successfully completed coordinations while the original execution logic and protocol stay untouched. Success rates remain the same and maneuvers begin earlier. The added work stays small because the method does not examine a large number of candidates.

Core claim

Multi-target maneuver coordination extends the pre-coordination decision process so that a vehicle can identify and select among multiple potential coordination partners for a given maneuver. The extension requires no modifications to maneuver execution logic or the underlying coordination protocol. In operation it raises the number of triggered and successfully executed coordinations, keeps computational cost low, preserves coordination success rates, and permits earlier maneuver initiation.

What carries the argument

Multi-target selection performed only in the decision-making phase that precedes coordination.

If this is right

More maneuvers are triggered and completed per vehicle.
Coordination success rates stay unchanged.
Maneuvers start at earlier times.
Computational overhead remains low without examining many targets.
No updates are required to existing execution logic or protocols.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same decision-layer change could be applied to other single-target negotiation protocols in automated traffic.
Earlier maneuver starts may reduce overall travel time in dense corridors.
The approach could be tested by counting coordination events in mixed fleets containing both equipped and unequipped vehicles.

Load-bearing premise

Multiple feasible target vehicles are typically present and the decision-making extension can be added without any changes to maneuver execution logic or the coordination protocol.

What would settle it

A controlled simulation or on-road test in which the number of triggered coordinations does not rise when the multi-target decision step is active, or in which the protocol must be altered to support the extension.

read the original abstract

Maneuver coordination is a key enabler of connected and automated driving, allowing vehicles to negotiate and execute maneuvers that would otherwise be difficult, inefficient or unsafe. Existing approaches and use cases typically assume coordination with a single predefined target vehicle, which limits the number of coordination opportunities. This paper introduces a maneuver coordination approach based on multi-target selection, which allows a vehicle to identify and select among multiple potential coordination vehicles for a given maneuver. Multi-target maneuver coordination does not require modifications to the maneuver execution logic or to the underlying coordination protocol. Instead, it extends the decision-making process preceding coordination, enabling vehicles to exploit a broader set of feasible cooperative interactions. Results show that multi-target maneuver coordination significantly increases triggered and successfully executed coordinations while maintaining a low computational cost, as the proposed approach achieves these gains without requiring the analysis of a large number of potential target vehicles. These improvements preserve coordination success rates while enabling earlier maneuver initiation.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper shows a clean extension to single-target coordination via multi-target selection that raises the number of triggered maneuvers in simulation without touching the protocol or adding much compute.

read the letter

The main point is that vehicles can now choose among multiple possible coordination targets for a given maneuver instead of being stuck with one. The simulations report more coordinations triggered and completed, earlier starts, and unchanged success rates at low extra computational cost.

What is new is the decision-making step that picks the target. The authors keep the execution logic and the underlying protocol exactly the same, so the change is localized. That separation is useful because it lets existing systems add the feature without a full redesign.

The results line up with the claim: gains come without scanning large numbers of candidates, which keeps the overhead down. This is a practical increment for connected automated driving work.

The soft spot is the evaluation. The abstract states positive outcomes on triggered coordinations and cost but gives almost no information on how the scenarios were built, how targets were distributed, or how statistical significance was checked. If the full paper has those details it would strengthen the case; right now the numbers are hard to assess for robustness across densities or with realistic packet loss.

This is for researchers working on V2X maneuver coordination and automated driving protocols. Someone already using single-target methods could see how to broaden it.

I would send it for peer review. The idea is straightforward, the separation of concerns is clear, and the reported gains address a real operational limit even if the experiments need more scrutiny.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a multi-target maneuver coordination approach for connected automated driving. It extends only the pre-coordination decision-making process to identify and select among multiple potential target vehicles for a given maneuver. This requires no changes to maneuver execution logic or the underlying coordination protocol. Simulation results are reported to show significant increases in triggered and successfully executed coordinations, low computational cost (without analyzing large numbers of candidates), preserved success rates, and earlier maneuver initiation compared to single-target baselines.

Significance. If the experimental results hold under rigorous validation, the work offers a practical, protocol-compatible way to increase coordination opportunities in CAD without redesigning core execution mechanisms. This could improve maneuver efficiency and safety in multi-vehicle scenarios while maintaining real-time feasibility due to the claimed low overhead.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of significantly increased triggered/successful coordinations with preserved success rates rests entirely on simulation outcomes, yet the abstract (and by extension the evaluation) provides no information on simulation setup, scenario generation, number of runs, statistical significance testing, or precise definition/measurement of 'success rate' and 'triggered coordination'. This is load-bearing for the reported improvements and prevents verification of the quantitative gains.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback highlighting the need for greater transparency in the abstract regarding simulation details. We address the major comment below and will make the requested clarifications.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim of significantly increased triggered/successful coordinations with preserved success rates rests entirely on simulation outcomes, yet the abstract (and by extension the evaluation) provides no information on simulation setup, scenario generation, number of runs, statistical significance testing, or precise definition/measurement of 'success rate' and 'triggered coordination'. This is load-bearing for the reported improvements and prevents verification of the quantitative gains.

Authors: We agree the abstract is too concise on these points and will revise it to briefly note the simulation environment (SUMO-based highway/urban scenarios), number of runs (50 independent runs per configuration), statistical testing (t-tests for significance), and metric definitions (success rate as ratio of executed to triggered coordinations; triggered coordination as initiation of a coordination request). The evaluation section (Section V) already provides these details in full, including scenario generation parameters and measurement procedures, so the evaluation itself does not lack the information; however, we will add explicit cross-references in the abstract to improve accessibility and verifiability without changing any results or claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper introduces a multi-target selection extension to existing maneuver coordination protocols, with central claims resting on simulation outcomes showing increased triggered coordinations and preserved success rates. No equations, fitted parameters, self-definitional constructs, or load-bearing self-citations are present in the provided description. The approach is described as adding decision-making logic without altering execution or protocol, and results are externally falsifiable via simulation benchmarks rather than reducing to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5714 in / 1011 out tokens · 13866 ms · 2026-06-26T11:13:36.035791+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

8 extracted references

[1]

A Generic Approach towards Maneuver Coordination for Automated Vehicles,

B. Lehmann, H. J. Günther and L. Wolf, “A Generic Approach towards Maneuver Coordination for Automated Vehicles,” Proc. IEEE 21st Int. Conf. on ITS (ITSC), Hawaii, USA, pp. 3333-3339, 4-7 Nov. 2018

2018
[2]

Negotiation Patterns for V2X Cooperative Driving: How complex Maneuver Coordination can be?,

D. Maksimovski and C. Facchi , "Negotiation Patterns for V2X Cooperative Driving: How complex Maneuver Coordination can be?," Proc. IEEE 98th Veh. Tech. Conf. (VTC2023-Fall), Hong Kong, 2023

2023
[3]

A Survey on Cooperative Architectures and Maneuvers for Connected and Automated Vehicles,

Häfner, V. Bajpai, J. Ott and G. A. Schmitt, "A Survey on Cooperative Architectures and Maneuvers for Connected and Automated Vehicles," IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 24, 2022

2022
[4]

An Advanced Coordination Protocol for Safer and more Efficient Lane Change for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles,

J. Hodgkiss, et al., "An Advanced Coordination Protocol for Safer and more Efficient Lane Change for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles," Proc. 16th IEEE CCNC, Las Vegas, USA, 11-14 Jan. 2019

2019
[5]

Towards effective V2X maneuver coordinations: state machine, challenges and countermeasures,

R. Molina -Masegosa, et al. , "Towards effective V2X maneuver coordinations: state machine, challenges and countermeasures," Proc. IEEE 100th Veh. Tech. Conf. (VTC2024-Fall), Washington DC, 2024

2024
[6]

V2X Communications for Maneuver Coordination in Connected Automated Driving: Message Generation Rules,

R. Molina -Masegosa, et al. , "V2X Communications for Maneuver Coordination in Connected Automated Driving: Message Generation Rules," IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag., vol. 18 (3), pp. 91-100, Sept. 2023

2023
[7]

Importance of Intent -Sharing for V2X - based Maneuver Coordination,

R. Molina-Masegosa, et al., "Importance of Intent -Sharing for V2X - based Maneuver Coordination," Proc. IEEE 102nd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2025-Fall), Chengdu, China, Oct. 2025

2025
[8]

Highway Mobility and Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks in ns-3,

H. Arbabi and Michele C. Weigle, “Highway Mobility and Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks in ns-3,” Proc. of the Winter Simulation Conference. Baltimore, MD, USA, pp. 2991-3003, 5-8 Dec. 2010. Fig. 7. Successful maneuver coordinations per vehicle per hour for single and multi-target maneuver coordination. Fig. 8. Coordination anticipation time. Fig. 9. Distributio...

2010

[1] [1]

A Generic Approach towards Maneuver Coordination for Automated Vehicles,

B. Lehmann, H. J. Günther and L. Wolf, “A Generic Approach towards Maneuver Coordination for Automated Vehicles,” Proc. IEEE 21st Int. Conf. on ITS (ITSC), Hawaii, USA, pp. 3333-3339, 4-7 Nov. 2018

2018

[2] [2]

Negotiation Patterns for V2X Cooperative Driving: How complex Maneuver Coordination can be?,

D. Maksimovski and C. Facchi , "Negotiation Patterns for V2X Cooperative Driving: How complex Maneuver Coordination can be?," Proc. IEEE 98th Veh. Tech. Conf. (VTC2023-Fall), Hong Kong, 2023

2023

[3] [3]

A Survey on Cooperative Architectures and Maneuvers for Connected and Automated Vehicles,

Häfner, V. Bajpai, J. Ott and G. A. Schmitt, "A Survey on Cooperative Architectures and Maneuvers for Connected and Automated Vehicles," IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 24, 2022

2022

[4] [4]

An Advanced Coordination Protocol for Safer and more Efficient Lane Change for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles,

J. Hodgkiss, et al., "An Advanced Coordination Protocol for Safer and more Efficient Lane Change for Connected and Autonomous Vehicles," Proc. 16th IEEE CCNC, Las Vegas, USA, 11-14 Jan. 2019

2019

[5] [5]

Towards effective V2X maneuver coordinations: state machine, challenges and countermeasures,

R. Molina -Masegosa, et al. , "Towards effective V2X maneuver coordinations: state machine, challenges and countermeasures," Proc. IEEE 100th Veh. Tech. Conf. (VTC2024-Fall), Washington DC, 2024

2024

[6] [6]

V2X Communications for Maneuver Coordination in Connected Automated Driving: Message Generation Rules,

R. Molina -Masegosa, et al. , "V2X Communications for Maneuver Coordination in Connected Automated Driving: Message Generation Rules," IEEE Veh. Technol. Mag., vol. 18 (3), pp. 91-100, Sept. 2023

2023

[7] [7]

Importance of Intent -Sharing for V2X - based Maneuver Coordination,

R. Molina-Masegosa, et al., "Importance of Intent -Sharing for V2X - based Maneuver Coordination," Proc. IEEE 102nd Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC2025-Fall), Chengdu, China, Oct. 2025

2025

[8] [8]

Highway Mobility and Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks in ns-3,

H. Arbabi and Michele C. Weigle, “Highway Mobility and Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks in ns-3,” Proc. of the Winter Simulation Conference. Baltimore, MD, USA, pp. 2991-3003, 5-8 Dec. 2010. Fig. 7. Successful maneuver coordinations per vehicle per hour for single and multi-target maneuver coordination. Fig. 8. Coordination anticipation time. Fig. 9. Distributio...

2010