scholarly journals Driver intervention performance assessment as a key aspect of L3–L4 automated vehicles deployment

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 845-852
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Rodak ◽  
Paweł Budziszewski ◽  
Małgorzata Pędzierska ◽  
Mikołaj Kruszewski
Keyword(s):  
Performance Assessment ◽  
Minimal Risk ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Driving System ◽  
Driving Task ◽  
Driving Conditions

Abstract In L3–L4 vehicles, driving task is performed primarily by automated driving system (ADS). Automation mode permits to engage in non-driving-related tasks; however, it necessitates continuous vigilance and attention. Although the driver may be distracted, a request to intervene may suddenly occur, requiring immediate and appropriate response to driving conditions. To increase safety, automated vehicles should be equipped with a Driver Intervention Performance Assessment module (DIPA), ensuring that the driver is able to take the control of the vehicle and maintain it safely. Otherwise, ADS should regain control from the driver and perform a minimal risk manoeuvre. The paper explains the essence of DIPA, indicates possible measures, and describes a concept of DIPA framework being developed in the project.

When the automated driving system fails: Dynamics of public responses to automated vehicles

2021 ◽  
Vol 129 ◽  
pp. 103271
Author(s):  
Zhigang Xu ◽  
Zijun Jiang ◽  
Guanqun Wang ◽  
Runmin Wang ◽  
Tingting Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Driving System

scholarly journals A Fail-Operational Control Architecture Approach and Dead-Reckoning Strategy in Case of Positioning Failures

Sensors ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 442
Author(s):  
Jose Angel Matute-Peaspan ◽  
Joshue Perez ◽  
Asier Zubizarreta
Keyword(s):  
Dead Reckoning ◽  
Human Interaction ◽  
Control Architecture ◽  
Minimal Risk ◽  
Operational Control ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Risk Condition ◽  
Driving Task ◽  
System Verification ◽  
Set Up

Presently, in the event of a failure in Automated Driving Systems, control architectures rely on hardware redundancies over software solutions to assure reliability or wait for human interaction in takeover requests to achieve a minimal risk condition. As user confidence and final acceptance of this novel technology are strongly related to enabling safe states, automated fall-back strategies must be assured as a response to failures while the system is performing a dynamic driving task. In this work, a fail-operational control architecture approach and dead-reckoning strategy in case of positioning failures are developed and presented. A fail-operational system is capable of detecting failures in the last available positioning source, warning the decision stage to set up a fall-back strategy and planning a new trajectory in real time. The surrounding objects and road borders are considered during the vehicle motion control after failure, to avoid collisions and lane-keeping purposes. A case study based on a realistic urban scenario is simulated for testing and system verification. It shows that the proposed approach always bears in mind both the passenger’s safety and comfort during the fall-back maneuvering execution.

scholarly journals A temporal analysis of safety drivers taking back control in public roadway automated driving trials

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 1532-1536
Author(s):  
Nicole M. Corcoran ◽  
Daniel V. McGehee ◽  
T. Zachary Noonan
Keyword(s):  
Autonomous Vehicle ◽  
Temporal Analysis ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environment Research ◽  
Operational Design ◽  
Take Back ◽  
Driving Task ◽  
Over Time

In 2019, industry is in the testing stages of level 4 SAE/NHTSA automated vehicles. While in testing, L4 vehicles require a safety driver to monitor the driving task at all times. These specially trained drivers must take back control if the vehicle doesn’t seem to be responding correctly to the ever-changing roadway and environment. Research suggests that monitoring the driving task can lead to a decrease in vigilance over time. Recently, Waymo publicly released takeover request and mileage data on its 2018 L4 autonomous vehicle takeover requests. From this data, which was represented in mileage, we created temporal metric which showed that there were typically 150-250 hours without a takeover request. From this we suggest that there may be a decrement in vigilance for Waymo safety drivers. While there are still many unknowns, we suggest Waymo release takeover requests in terms of time rather than mileage and provide more information on the operational design domains of these vehicles. Expanding the content of this publicly-released data could then give researchers and the public more understanding of the conditions under which safety drivers are functioning.

scholarly journals Potential Crash Rate Benchmarks for Automated Vehicles

2021 ◽  
pp. 036119812110098
Author(s):  
Noah J. Goodall
Keyword(s):  
Stated Preference ◽  
Average Rate ◽  
Crash Risk ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
The Public ◽  
Crash Rates ◽  
Potential Safety ◽  
Transportation Modes ◽  
Driving Task

Most automobile manufacturers and several technology companies are testing automated vehicles (AVs) on public roads. While automation of the driving task is expected to reduce crashes, there is no consensus as to how safe an AV must be before it can be deployed. An AV should be at least as safe as the average driver, but national crash rates include drunk and distracted driving, meaning that an AV that crashes at the average rate is somewhere between drunk and sober. In this paper, safety benchmarks for AVs are explored from three perspectives. First, crash rates from naturalistic driving studies are used to determine the crash risk of the model (i.e., sober, rested, attentive, cautious) driver. Second, stated preference surveys in the literature are reviewed to estimate the AV risk acceptable to the public. Third, crash, injury, and fatality rates from other transportation modes are compared as baseline safety levels. A range of potential safety targets is presented as a guide for policymakers, regulators, and AV developers to assist in evaluating the safety of automated driving technologies for public use.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Takeover Performance During Conditionally Automated Driving

2020 ◽  
pp. 001872082097647
Author(s):  
Bradley W. Weaver ◽  
Patricia R. DeLucia
Keyword(s):  
Time Budget ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Task Engagement ◽  
Information Support ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Driving System ◽  
Weak Evidence ◽  
Dependent Variables ◽  
Driving Task

Objective The aim of this paper was to synthesize the experimental research on factors that affect takeover performance during conditionally automated driving. Background For conditionally automated driving, the automated driving system (ADS) can handle the entire dynamic driving task but only for limited domains. When the system reaches a limit, the driver is responsible for taking over vehicle control, which may be affected by how much time they are provided to take over, what they were doing prior to the takeover, or the type of information provided to them during the takeover. Method Out of 8446 articles identified by a systematic literature search, 48 articles containing 51 experiments were included in the meta-analysis. Coded independent variables were time budget, non-driving related task engagement and resource demands, and information support during the takeover. Coded dependent variables were takeover timing and quality measures. Results Engaging in non-driving related tasks results in degraded takeover performance, particularly if it has overlapping resource demands with the driving task. Weak evidence suggests takeover performance is impaired with shorter time budgets. Current implementations of information support did not affect takeover performance. Conclusion Future research and implementation should focus on providing the driver more time to take over while automation is active and should further explore information support. Application The results of the current paper indicate the need for the development and deployment of vehicle-to-everything (V2X) services and driver monitoring.

scholarly journals A Taxonomy of Strategies For Supporting Time-Sharing With Non-Driving Tasks in Automated Driving

2019 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 2088-2092
Author(s):  
Dengbo He ◽  
Dina Kanaan ◽  
Birsen Donmez
Keyword(s):  
Driver Distraction ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Time Sharing ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Spare Capacity ◽  
Control Automation ◽  
Driving Task

Driver distraction is one of the leading causes of vehicle crashes. The introduction of higher levels of vehicle control automation is expected to alleviate the negative effects of distraction by delegating the driving task to automation, thus enabling drivers to engage in non-driving-related tasks more safely. However, before fully automated vehicles are realized, drivers are still expected to play a supervisory role and intervene with the driving task if necessary while potentially having more spare capacity for engaging in non-driving-related tasks. Traditional distraction mitigation perspectives need to be shifted for automated vehicles from mainly preventing the occurrence of non-driving-related tasks to dynamically coordinating time-sharing between driving and non-driving-related tasks. In this paper, we provide a revised and expanded taxonomy of driver distraction mitigation strategies, discuss how the different strategies can be used in an automated driving context, and propose directions for future research in supporting time-sharing in automated vehicles.

scholarly journals An approach to organizing the transition of vehicle control from an automated driving system to a person

Doklady BGUIR ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 40-46
Author(s):  
V. A. Dubovsky ◽  
V. V. Savchenko
Keyword(s):  
Automotive Industry ◽  
Road Safety ◽  
Vehicle Control ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Vehicle Performance ◽  
Driving System ◽  
Psychophysiological State ◽  
State Of The Environment ◽  
Level Monitoring

The analysis of trends in the development of the automotive industry and well-known methods of automating vehicle control served the basis for us to propose an approach to organizing the transfer of vehicle control from an automated driving system to a person. The approach involves monitoring the vehicle performance and the systems that provide automated driving, the state of the environment and the driver's psychophysiological state, as well as road conditions on the upcoming path, predicting the place and time of transition of control to the driver, determining and regulating his/her readiness to take control if necessary. This approach is peculiar for in time of automated driving, the minimum level of the driver's readiness to operate the vehicle is constantly maintained, which is brought to optimal within a certain time before the scheduled transition to manual control. This two-level monitoring of the condition of drivers of highly automated vehicles will improve road safety both in cases of predicted and unexpected need for an emergency transition from automated to manual driving. The aim of the work is to develop a methodology for improving road safety with highly automated vehicles involved.

Peripheral Monitoring of Traffic in Conditionally Automated Driving

2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 1828-1832 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Radlmayr ◽  
Karin Brüch ◽  
Kathrin Schmidt ◽  
Christine Solbeck ◽  
Tristan Wehner
Keyword(s):  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Active System ◽  
Subject Design ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Driving Task

Conditionally automated vehicles (level 3) allow drivers to engage in visual, non-driving related tasks (NDRTs) while the automation is active. System limits require drivers to reengage in the dynamic driving task in take-over situations. If the NDRT is visually engaging, situation awareness (SA) necessary for a successful take-over can decrease. This study analyzed, if the SA of drivers increases while monitoring the surrounding traffic peripherally. A semi-transparent balloon game in the head-up display operationalized the engagement into a visual NDRT with the possibility of peripheral monitoring. In addition, participants without the possibility of monitoring due to simulated heavy fog (second group) were tested along with a third group that could monitor surroundings self-determined without a NDRT. The between-subject design included 57 participants. Results showed that self-determined monitoring leads to higher situation awareness compared to peripheral monitoring and no monitoring. This did not result in better take-over performances.

scholarly journals Potential Crash Rate Benchmarks for Automated Vehicles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah J. Goodall
Keyword(s):  
Stated Preference ◽  
Average Rate ◽  
Crash Risk ◽  
Automated Vehicles ◽  
Automated Driving ◽  
Automated Vehicle ◽  
Crash Rates ◽  
Potential Safety ◽  
Transportation Modes ◽  
Driving Task

Most automobile manufacturers and several technology companies are testing automated vehicles on public roads. While automation of the driving task is expected to reduce crashes, there is no consensus regarding how safe an automated vehicle must be before it can be deployed. An automated vehicle should be at least as safe as the average driver, but national crash rates include drunk and distracted driving, meaning that an automated vehicle that crashes at the average rate is somewhere between drunk and sober. In this paper, automated vehicle safety benchmarks are explored from three perspectives. First, crash rates from naturalistic driving studies are used to determine the crash risk of the model (i.e., sober, rested, attentive, cautious) driver. Second, stated preference surveys in the literature are reviewed to estimate the public’s acceptable automated vehicle risk. Third, crash, injury, and fatality rates from other transportation modes are compared as baseline safety levels. A range of potential safety targets is presented as a guide for policymakers, regulators, and automated vehicle developers to assist in evaluating the safety of automated driving technologies for public use.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document