  With autonomous vehicles (AV) set to integrate further into regular human
traffic, there is an increasing consensus of treating AV motion planning as a
multi-agent problem. However, the traditional game theoretic assumption of
complete rationality is too strong for the purpose of human driving, and there
is a need for understanding human driving as a \emph{bounded rational} activity
through a behavioral game theoretic lens. To that end, we adapt three
metamodels of bounded rational behavior; two based on Quantal level-k and one
based on Nash equilibrium with quantal errors. We formalize the different
solution concepts that can be applied in the context of hierarchical games, a
framework used in multi-agent motion planning, for the purpose of creating game
theoretic models of driving behavior. Furthermore, based on a contributed
dataset of human driving at a busy urban intersection with a total of ~4k
agents and ~44k decision points, we evaluate the behavior models on the basis
of model fit to naturalistic data, as well as their predictive capacity. Our
results suggest that among the behavior models evaluated, modeling driving
behavior as pure strategy NE with quantal errors at the level of maneuvers with
bounds sampling of actions at the level of trajectories provides the best fit
to naturalistic driving behavior, and there is a significant impact of
situational factors on the performance of behavior models.
