\_FP                   1.134                     0.0921
  Titan\_AIM (ours)              **1.081**                 **0.0824**

  : Comparison of Future ego motion prediction. acceleration error in $m/s^2$ and yaw rate error in $rad/s$.

\[tbl:fe\]

Future Ego-Motion Prediction
----------------------------

The quantitative results for future ego-motion prediction are shown in Table \[tbl:fe\]. Between Const-Vel [@constvel] and Const-Acc (acceleration), the Const-Vel baseline performs better in predicting angular velocity (yaw-rate) and Const-Acc performs better for predicting acceleration. Titan\_vanilla only takes the past ego-motion as input, performing better than Const-Vel and Const-Acc for acceleration prediction. Although incorporating information of other agents’ future predictions (Titan\_FP) does not improve the performance over Titan\_vanilla, the addition of their action priors (Titan\_FP+AP) shows better performance for both acceleration and yaw rate prediction. By adding just future position in the AIM module (Titan\_AIM\_FP), the system can weight the importance of other agents’ behavior with respect to the ego-future, resulting in decreased error rates. Finally, by incorporating future position and action in the AIM module as a prior yields the best performance, Titan\_AIM.

To show the interpretability of which participant is more important for ego-future, we visualize the importance weights in Figure \[fig:attn\]. In particular, the top row illustrates that the importance weight of the pedestrian increases as the future motion direction (in white arrow) is towards the ego-vehicle’s future motion. Although the agent is closer to the ego-vehicle at a later time step, the importance decreases as the future motion changes. This mechanism provides insight into assessment of perceived risk for other agents from the perspective of the ego-vehicle.

Conclusion
==========

We presented a model that can reason about the future trajectory of scene agents from egocentric views obtained from a mobile platform. Our hypothesis was that action priors provide meaningful interactions and also important cues for making future trajectory predictions. To validate this hypothesis, we developed a model that incorporates prior positions, actions, and context to simultaneously forecast future trajectory of agents and future ego-motion. For evaluation, we created a novel dataset with over 700 video clips containing labels of
\_FP                    1.134                      0.0921 
   Titan\_AIM (ours)               * * 1.081 * *                  * * 0.0824 * * 

  : Comparison of Future ego motion prediction. acceleration error in $ m / s^2 $ and yaw rate error in $ radian / s$. 

 \[tbl: fe\ ] 

 Future Ego - Motion Prediction 
 ---------------------------- 

 The quantitative result for future ego - motion prediction are shown in Table   \[tbl: fe\ ]. Between Const - Vel   [ @constvel ] and Const - Acc (acceleration), the Const - Vel service line performs well in predicting angular velocity (yaw - pace) and Const - Acc do better for predict acceleration. Titan\_vanilla only takes the past self - motion as input, performing better than Const - Vel and Const - Acc for acceleration prediction. Although incorporate information of other agents ’ future predictions (Titan\_FP) does not improve the operation over Titan\_vanilla, the addition of their action priors (Titan\_FP+AP) prove better performance for both acceleration and yaw pace prediction. By adding precisely future position in the AIM faculty (Titan\_AIM\_FP), the system can weight the importance of other agents ’ demeanor with respect to the ego - future, resulting in decreased error rates. Finally, by incorporating future position and action in the AIM module as a prior yields the best performance, Titan\_AIM. 

 To show the interpretability of which participant is more important for ego - future, we visualize the importance weight in Figure   \[fig: attn\ ]. In particular, the top row illustrate that the importance weight of the pedestrian increases as the future motion direction (in blank arrow) is towards the ego - vehicle ’s future motion. Although the agent is closer to the self - vehicle at a later time step, the importance decreases as the future motion changes. This mechanism provides insight into assessment of perceived risk for early agents from the position of the ego - vehicle. 

 Conclusion 
 = = = = = = = = = = 

 We presented a model that can reason about the future trajectory of scene agent from egocentric views obtained from a mobile platform. Our hypothesis was that action priors put up meaningful interactions and also significant cues for make future trajectory predictions. To validate this hypothesis, we developed a mannequin that incorporates prior positions, actions, and context to simultaneously forecast future trajectory of agent and future ego - movement. For evaluation, we created a novel dataset with over 700 video clips containing label of
\_FP                   1.134                     0.0921
  Titan\_EIM (oura)              **1.081**                 **0.0824**

  : Clmparisin of Future ego motiov predictpon. accelwratmon error in $m/s^2$ ehd yaw vcte edvor iu $cad/s$.

\[tbl:fe\]

Future Ego-Motion Prediction
----------------------------

The qjautitative results for future ego-motijn predochion are shown in Uabje \[tbm:fe\]. Between Const-Vel [@constvel] and Cknst-Acc (acceleration), the Const-Vel baseline pervormd better in prediching angulat vejicity (yaw-ratd) and Consu-Aec performs better for predicting acceleragion. Citan\_vanillq inlj takes the 'ast edo-motion as lmput, parformimg better than Coist-Vwl and Const-Acc for arceleration predictijn. Althouch incorporating indoematimn ox otfwr xgehtx’ ruture prxdictions (Tjtan\_FP) does not improve the petfjgkance over Tjtan\_vagijla, the addition of their action priors (Tifan\_FP+AP) shows better peeformance for both acfeleratiog and yaw rate prediction. By adding just future pmsitikv iu the XUM module (Titan\_AIM\_FP), the system can weight the yjpprnance of other agcnts’ behavior with rfslgct to the ego-wuture, reaulting in decreasfd errot ratew. Finally, by oncorporating future positiin and actiou ib the AIM module ad a prior ynelds jhe bext performance, Titan\_AIM.

Co shos the interoretabilifh of which partizipsnd is mort important for egj-future, wx visbalize tfe ikportagce weightd in Nhgure \[fig:attn\]. In pagticupas, the top gow illustrates that the importeice weight of tve iedestriau incrcases as the fueure motion ditection (iu whitd arrow) is towardv the ego-vericle’s future lotion. Althongh the adent is xloser gu the ego-vehicke at a lcuer time srep, the importance dezdeases as the fbuurt notion changes. Thks iebhaiism [sovides insicht kntu assersment of pcrcdivec risk for other agetts rrom the perspectife of the ggo-vehiclq.

Conclusion
==========

We presented a model that cai reaspn wbout the future trajectory of scene agfntf from egocegtrig vigws obtaineb from a mobile platform. Our hypothesis xas that action priors provide meaningful nnueractions anv also importand cues for making furure trajectory pvedictions. To validate this vypotjesis, we developed a model that incorporates prior positions, actions, and xontexv eo simultansousky fogeccst futurq trejxctory of agents snd future ego-motion. For evaluavion, we craaced a novel dataset with over 700 xideo clips cuntaining labels of
\_FP 1.134 0.0921 Titan\_AIM (ours) **1.081** **0.0824** of ego motion acceleration error in in \[tbl:fe\] Future Ego-Motion ---------------------------- The quantitative for future ego-motion prediction are shown Table \[tbl:fe\]. Between Const-Vel [@constvel] and Const-Acc (acceleration), the Const-Vel baseline performs better predicting angular velocity (yaw-rate) and Const-Acc performs better for predicting acceleration. Titan\_vanilla only the ego-motion input, better than Const-Vel and Const-Acc for acceleration prediction. Although incorporating information of other agents’ future predictions does not improve the performance over Titan\_vanilla, the of their action priors shows better performance for both and rate prediction. adding future in the AIM (Titan\_AIM\_FP), the system can weight the importance of other agents’ behavior with respect to the ego-future, resulting decreased error by incorporating position action the AIM module prior yields the best performance, Titan\_AIM. interpretability of which participant is more important for we visualize importance weights in Figure \[fig:attn\]. In the top row illustrates that the importance weight the pedestrian increases as the future motion direction (in white arrow) is towards the ego-vehicle’s Although the agent is to the ego-vehicle a time the decreases as future motion changes. This mechanism provides insight into assessment of perceived for other agents from the perspective of the ego-vehicle. Conclusion presented model that can about the future trajectory scene from egocentric views obtained mobile Our action provide interactions and also important for making future trajectory predictions. validate this hypothesis, we prior positions, actions, and context to simultaneously forecast trajectory of agents and future ego-motion. For we created a novel dataset with over 700 video clips containing labels
\_FP                   1.134                     0.0921
  Titan\_AIM (ours)              **1.081**                 **0.0824**

  : Comparison oF Future ego MotioN prEdiCtIon. aCcelEration error in $M/S^2$ and Yaw rate error in $rad/s$.

\[tbl:fE\]

FutuRe eGo-MoTIoN PredIction
----------------------------

THE qUANtiTaTiVe rEsULtS for fUtuRe ego-moTion predicTioN aRe shown in TabLE \[tBl:fe\]. BetweeN CoNst-Vel [@constvEl] aNd ConsT-ACc (aCCelerAtiOn), the const-VEL baselIne perforMs BEtter iN PredictING aNgulAr velocity (yaw-rate) ANd cOnst-Acc performS betteR fOR pREDicTinG acceleratIoN. TitaN\_Vanilla ONlY TAKes THe past ego-motiOn as input, peRForMing beTtEr tHAn ConsT-Vel aNd cOnsT-Acc for acceLeraTion prediCtion. ALThough iNCorporaTing inForMatIon oF OtHeR agEnTS’ fuTUrE prEDicTions (TitAn\_fP) Does nOt imPROVE the PerFormAnce oVer Titan\_vanilLa, tHe adDItiOn of tHeir aCtioN pRiors (titan\_Fp+AP) shOwS better performaNce fOr both accEleRaTioN aNd yaw RAte preDicTioN. By addiNg just fUTurE pOSITiOn in the AIM module (TiTaN\_aiM\_fP), the sysTem can WEiGhT The imporTaNce Of otHER agenTs’ beHAvIor with rEspect TO tHe Ego-futuRe, ResultInG in DecReaseD ErroR rates. finally, bY incoRPorating future POsition and actIOn IN ThE aIM mOduLe as a prior yIeldS The bEst pERfOrmANce, TiTan\_AIm.

TO ShOW the interpretabilitY oF which PartiCipant is more iMportant foR EGO-future, wE visUAlIZe the importancE weigHts in FigurE \[Fig:attn\]. IN partIcular, thE top row ilLUStrates tHat The ImpOrtANCe Weight of the peDEStriAn IncreasEs aS the futUre MotIon DirEcTion (in whiTe arrow) iS tOwArDs The Ego-veHIcle’s futUrE moTiOn. ALthouGH the agEnt is ClosEr To THe eGo-vehicLE aT A LateR tImE steP, thE iMportAnce DEcrEases as The future MotIOn chAnGeS. This meChanism providEs Insight intO aSseSsment OF PerceiveD risk for other agents from THe perspEctIve of The eGo-vehicle.

conClusioN
==========

We PResentEd a modEl thaT cAn rEASon abOUT tHe fUtUre trajectORY of Scene AgEnts From egoCentric views obtainED frOm a mobile platForM. Our HYPoTheSIs WAs tHaT ActION priors provide mEaningful iNtERaCtions and aLSo iMpOrtant cUes for mAking FUture trAjectory pRedictionS. TO valIDAte This hypothEsis, we deVeloped a mODel thAT iNcorpOraTes priOr PosItionS, actioNS, anD contExt to sImUltaneOusly FoRecast fuTure trajectory of agents aNd futuRe ego-MotIon. For evaLuaTIon, We created A novEl dataset wIth OveR 700 videO clIPs conTainINg LabELs of
\_FP                   1.1 34                0.09 21
 Titan\_AIM (o u rs)             **1.081**            **0 .0824** 
:  Co mp ar iso no fFutur e e go moti on predict ion .acceleration er ror in $m/ s^2 $ and yaw ra teerrorin  $r a d/s$. 

\ [tbl: fe\]
F utureEgo-Motio nP redict i on
---- - - -- ---- ----------------Th e  quantitativeresult sf or f utu reego-motion  p redic t ion are sh o w n  in Table \[tbl:f e\]. Betwee n  Co nst-Ve l[@c o nstvel ] and  C o nst -Acc (accel erat ion), the  Const - Vel bas e line pe rforms  be tte r in pr ed ict in g  an g ul arv elo city (ya w- ra te) a nd C o n s t -Acc  pe rfor ms be tter for pred ict inga cce lerat ion.Tita n\ _vani lla on ly ta ke s the past ego- moti on as inp ut,  p erf or mingb ettertha n C onst-Ve l and C o nst -A c c fo r acceleration pre di c t io n. Altho ugh in c or po r ating in fo rma tion o f oth er a g en ts’ futu re pre d ic ti ons (Ti ta n\_FP)  d oes  no t imp r ovethe pe rformanc e ove r  Titan\_vanill a , the additio n  o f th e ir a cti on priors ( Tita n \_FP +AP) sh ows bette r per fo r ma n ce for both acceler at ion an d yaw  rate predict ion. By ad d i n g just f utur e  p o sition in theAIM m odule (Tit a n\_AIM\_ FP),the syst em can we i g ht the i mpo rta nce  of o th er agents’ be h a vior  w ith res pec t to th e e go- fut ure ,resulting  in decr ea se der ror  rate s . Finall y,  by  i nco rpora t ing fu tureposi ti on and  action in t he A IM  m odul e a sa pri or y i eld s the b est perfo rma n ce,Ti ta n\_AIM. 

To show the  i nterpretab il ity  of wh i c h partic ipant is more important for ego -fu ture,  wevisualize  th e impo rta n ce wei ghts i n Fig ur e \ [ f ig:at t n \] . I nparticular , the  topro w il lustrat es that the import a nce  weight of th e p edes t r ia n i n cr e ase sa s t h e  future motiondirection(i n  w hite arrow )  is  t owardsthe ego -vehi c le’s fu ture moti on. Altho ug h th e age nt is clos er to th e ego-veh i cle a t  a  late r t ime st ep , t he im portan c e d ecrea ses as  t he fut ure m ot ion chan ges. This mechanism pro videsinsig htinto asse ssm e ntof percei vedrisk for o the r a gents  fr o m the  per s pe cti v e ofthee go-vehicl e .
Co n c lu sion
====== = = = =
We pr ese n ted amode l that can reason about the futu re t r a jec tor y  ofsc ene agents fro m e go c e ntric vi ew s obtainedfrom a m ob i le pl atform . Ourhypothe s i sw as tha t ac tio n priorspro vi d e meani ng fu l  inter acti on s andalso i m port a n t cues for makin g fut u r e tra j ect ory p re diction s . To  validatethis hypoth esis,we d evelo ped a m od el tha t i nc orporatesp rior posi tions , actio ns , an d c ontext  tos i multa neou sl y f orecast f u t ur e  t ra j ect oryof ag en ts a nd future ego-moti on. For eva lu ati o n , we c r ea t e d a noveldat asetw i th over 70 0  vid e oc lipscontai ning l abels o f 
\_FP _ _   _ __ __  _  1.134_   _  __            0.0921
 _Titan\_AIM_(ours) ___    _    _**1.081** _       __  _   **0.0824**

  : Comparison of Future_ego motion prediction. acceleration error in_$m/s^2$ and yaw_rate_error_in $rad/s$.

\[tbl:fe\]

Future Ego-Motion Prediction
----------------------------

The_quantitative results for future ego-motion prediction_are shown in Table \[tbl:fe\]. Between Const-Vel [@constvel]_and Const-Acc (acceleration), the Const-Vel baseline performs_better in predicting angular velocity (yaw-rate)_and Const-Acc performs better for_predicting acceleration._Titan\_vanilla only takes the past_ego-motion as input,_performing better_than Const-Vel and_Const-Acc for acceleration prediction. Although incorporating_information of other_agents’ future predictions (Titan\_FP) does not_improve_the performance over_Titan\_vanilla,_the_addition of_their action priors_(Titan\_FP+AP)_shows better_performance_for both acceleration and yaw rate_prediction._By adding just future position in the_AIM module (Titan\_AIM\_FP), the_system_can weight the importance_of other agents’ behavior with_respect to the ego-future, resulting in_decreased error_rates. Finally,_by incorporating future position and action in the AIM module as_a prior yields the best performance,_Titan\_AIM.

To show the interpretability_of which_participant_is more important_for_ego-future, we_visualize the importance weights in Figure \[fig:attn\]. In_particular, the_top row illustrates that the importance_weight of the pedestrian_increases_as the future motion direction (in_white arrow) is towards the ego-vehicle’s_future motion. Although the agent_is_closer_to the ego-vehicle at a_later time step, the importance decreases_as the future_motion changes. This mechanism provides insight into_assessment_of perceived risk for other agents_from_the perspective of the ego-vehicle.

Conclusion
==========

We presented_a_model_that can reason about the_future trajectory of scene agents from_egocentric views obtained from a mobile platform. Our hypothesis_was that action_priors provide meaningful interactions and_also_important_cues for making future trajectory predictions. To validate this hypothesis,_we developed_a model that_incorporates prior positions, actions, and context to simultaneously forecast future_trajectory of agents and future ego-motion. For_evaluation, we created a novel dataset with over 700 video clips_containing labels of