Over the past 10 years, vehicle trajectory forecasting has emerged to be a primary study area in smart transportation systems and hence the rapid progress of independent driving technologies. Deep learning models, mainly convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and recurrent neural networks (RNNs), have been the ones to guide the action in perfectly and dependably predicting movement and the possible movements of surrounding agents. Yet, these models are often data driven systems which constructs it solid for their creators and researchers to know how they actually arise with their decisions—a major care when it comes to security. The authors of the present paper want to convey that the combination of current projects in explainable artificial intelligence (XAI), trajectory forecasting, and deep learning-based object localization not only might improve but also could hand a better understanding of projecting reliability. The paper starts with the sketch of essential sentimental architectures like R-CNN, Fast R-CNN, Faster R-CNN, SSD, and YOLO to identify vehicles and foot-travellers, two important inputs for trajectory prophesy. So as to build the autonomous decision-making process more elastic and reliable, the study then inspects modern prediction systems that fuse multichannel learning, background understanding, and spatial-temporal reasoning. The explainability methods like Grad-CAM and Grad-CAM++, which indicate neuronal attention to convey how deep learning models sense motion, hindrances, and interplays, are particularly focused on. By combining transparent reasoning structures with strong sensory skills, the researchers can build not only accurate but also more understandable and reliable systems.
The report presents the adjustment between model execution and clarity, the challenge of dealing with different traffic plan, and the lack of a common evaluation benchmark as the main issues that still need to be settled. It concludes by indicate the inevitably of more research on developing learning channels for next-generation autonomous vehicles that are more flexible, interpretable, and vigilant.
Introduction
The integration of artificial intelligence with vehicle control is transforming the transportation industry, especially through the rise of self-driving cars. A key challenge is trajectory prediction, which enables autonomous vehicles to anticipate the movements of surrounding traffic participants such as cars, cyclists, and pedestrians. Accurate predictions are essential for safety and smooth navigation in complex environments.
Autonomous systems rely heavily on image processing and have evolved from early object-detection models—such as R-CNN, SSD, and YOLO—which identify and track objects in real time. Fast detectors support real-time reactions, while high-accuracy models enhance safety in critical scenarios. Modern research further analyzes the interactions between multiple traffic agents using advanced deep-learning architectures like RNNs, GNNs, and Transformers to improve motion forecasting.
However, these deep models often operate as black boxes, which reduces trust. To address this, Explainable AI (XAI) techniques—such as Grad-CAM and Grad-CAM++—are used to show which image regions influence a model’s decisions. Explainability increases transparency, supports model optimization, and strengthens user confidence. Although challenges such as uncertainty management and accountability persist, the field is progressing toward safer, smarter, and more transparent autonomous vehicles.
The literature review highlights how advances in deep learning, object detection, and interpretable models have shaped modern autonomous-driving systems.
Key Literature Review Points
A. Trajectory Prediction for Autonomous Driving
Researchers categorize trajectory-prediction methods based on their data inputs (e.g., HD maps, LiDAR, camera data, past trajectories), modeling approaches (physics-based, machine-learning, deep-learning, reinforcement learning), and evaluation metrics (ADE, FDE, NLL). Frameworks like Trajectron++, LaneGCN, VectorNet, and MultiPath++ address spatial context and multimodal prediction.
Challenges include:
Poor generalization across diverse weather and road conditions
Sensor noise and uncertainty
Difficulty explaining deep-learning decisions
The survey emphasizes the need for more robust, transparent, and generalizable prediction models.
B. Recent Advances in Deep Learning for Object Detection
Modern object-detection research focuses on:
Two-stage detectors (R-CNN, Fast/Faster R-CNN, Mask R-CNN): high accuracy but slower
Single-stage detectors (YOLO, SSD): real-time performance with slightly lower accuracy
Techniques like feature pyramid networks, multi-scale learning, and anchor-free methods improve detection of small, overlapping, or complex objects. Object detection forms the perception foundation for trajectory prediction in autonomous vehicles.
C. Comparative Study of Deep Learning Object-Detection Algorithms
A comparative analysis of R-CNN, Fast R-CNN, Faster R-CNN, SSD, and YOLO evaluates:
Architectural differences
Training complexity
Real-world performance
The study helps researchers select appropriate detection models based on required accuracy, speed, and application context.
Conclusion
The collection of papers that have been examined indicates that deep learning has made an astonishing progress in the fields of perception, motion forecasting, and interpretability for self- driving cars. The 2025 paper on Trajectory Prediction for Autonomous Driving identifies the problems and advances in the area of predicting vehicle movement and presents the issues such as safety that require a good understanding of the context and clear models. The, on the other hand, studies focusing on the topic of object detection—like those conducted by Wu et al. (2019) and Olorunshola et al. (2023)—show the dependence of the perception frameworks, such as YOLO, SSD, and Faster R-CNN, on the reliability of finding and marking the nearby road users, which forms the input layer for the subsequent trajectory models. The Grad- CAM++ framework (2021) provides the missing piece of the puzzle in interpretability, as it presents visual justifications that clarify the reasoning behind the projections of neural networks and simultaneously increase the trust of the user.
When these studies are compared, it becomes apparent that they have mutualistic capabilities: the object detectors are very accurate and provide a very good visual comprehension quickly but they cannot forecast very well; on the other hand, the trajectory models are very accurate in their movement predictions but they often lack transparency which is a disadvantage; and the explainability techniques such as Grad-CAM++ provide the understanding of the networks that’s the reason why they expose the area of the networks’ focus for the forecasts. Overall, the literature indicates that the future of self-driving vehicles will be based on the merging of highly accurate perception, contextually aware prediction, and transparent reasoning that is all done in one deep-learning pipeline. To conclude, the papers reviewed provide a clear way for the research intended to be carried out—the creation of an explainable trajectory-prediction framework that will not only be able to estimate the motion accurately but also effectively communicate the reasoning behind every prediction. This kind of combination is needed for making autonomous systems that technically dependable and valuable of human trust.
References
[1] Abe, S., & Takahashi, M. (2023). Vision-language models for autonomous driving: A comprehensive survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00380. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2312.00380
[2] Atakishiyev, S., Salameh, M., Yao, H., & Goebel, R. (2021). Explainable artificial intelligence for autonomous driving: A comprehensive overview and field guide for future research directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11561.
[3] Botello, B., Buehler, R., Hankey, S., Mondschein, A., & Jiang, Z. (2019). Planning for walking and cycling in an autonomous-vehicle future. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 1, 100012.
[4] Chattopadhyay, A., Sarkar, A., Howlader, P., & Balasubramanian, V. N. (2018). Grad-CAM++: Improved visual explanations for deep convolutional networks. IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 30, 2947–2958. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIP.2018.2890093
[5] Chen, H., Wang, J., Shao, K., Liu, F., Hao, J., Guan, C., Chen, G., & Heng, P.-A. (2023). Traj-MAE: Masked autoencoders for trajectory prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.06697.
[6] Cui, H., Radosavljevic, V., Chou, F.-C., Lin, T.-H., Nguyen, T., Huang, T.-K., Schneider, J., & Djuric, N. (2019). Multimodal trajectory predictions for autonomous driving using deep convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (pp. 2090–2096). IEEE.
[7] Deo, N., & Trivedi, M. M. (2018). Convolutional social pooling for vehicle trajectory prediction. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops.
[8] Dosovitskiy, A., Ros, G., Codevilla, F., Lopez, A., & Koltun, V. (2017). CARLA: An open urban driving simulator. In Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Robot Learning.
[9] Fayyad, J., Jaradat, M. A., Gruyer, D., & Najjaran, H. (2020). Deep learning sensor fusion for autonomous vehicle perception and localization: A review. Sensors, 20(15), 4220. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20154220
[10] Hegde, C., Dash, S., & Agarwal, P. (2020). Vehicle trajectory prediction using GAN. In 2020 Fourth International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social, Mobile, Analytics and Cloud) (I-SMAC) (pp. 104–109). IEEE.
[11] Krüger, M., Novo, A. S., Nattermann, T., & Bertram, T. (2020). Interaction-aware trajectory prediction based on a 3D spatio-temporal tensor representation using convolutional–recurrent neural networks. In 2020 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV) (pp. 1122–1127). IEEE.
[12] Leon, F., & Gavrilescu, M. (2021). A review of tracking and trajectory prediction methods for autonomous driving. Mathematics, 9(660), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060660
[13] Leibe, B., Leonardis, A., & Schiele, B. (2008). Learning an alphabet of shape and appearance for multi-class object detection. International Journal of Computer Vision, 80(1), 16–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11263-007-0119-2
[14] Li, X. (2025). A review of deep learning-based trajectory prediction for autonomous vehicles. Advances in Engineering Technology Research, 14, 1077–1085. https://doi.org/10.47852/2790-1688.14.1.1077
[15] Li, X., Ying, X., & Chuah, M. C. (2019). GRIP++: Enhanced graph-based interaction-aware trajectory prediction for autonomous driving. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.07792.
[16] Makridis, G., Boullosa, P., & Sester, M. (2023). Enhancing explainability in mobility data science through a combination of methods. GeoXAI Workshop Proceedings, 3(1), 1–1
[17] Poggio, T., Serre, T., & Mutch, J. (2011). Visual object recognition. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, 5(2), 1–181. https://doi.org/10.2200/S00332ED1V01Y201103AIM010
[18] Shotton, J., Blake, A., & Cipolla, R. (2008). Object detection by global contour shape. Pattern Recognition, 41(12), 3736–3748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2008.06.015
[19] Sharma, S., Sistu, G., Yahiaoui, L., Das, A., Halton, M., & Eising, C. (2023). Navigating uncertainty: The role of short-term trajectory prediction in autonomous vehicle safety. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.05288.
[20] Sudderth, E. B., Torralba, A., Freeman, W. T., & Willsky, A. S. (2009). Unsupervised learning of probabilistic object models (POMs) for classification, segmentation, and recognition using knowledge propagation. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 31(10), 1747–1774. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2008.250