Reaction to a critical situation during driving with Adaptive Cruise Control for users and non-users of the system

Piccinini, Giulio Bianchi; Rodrigues, Carlos; Leitão, Miguel; Simões, Anabela

doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2014.09.008

Cited by 33 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some authors have argued that the ACC might have a negative impact on safety, primarily through a reduction in situational awareness, risk compensation, and a lack of understanding of the system’s functional limitations (de Winter et al 2014; Hoedemaeker & Brookhuis 1998; Piccinini et al 2014; Piccinini et al 2015; Rajaonah et al 2006; Seppelt & Lee 2007; Xiong et al 2012). For example, a simulator study of 38 participants (age 25–60) who drove with and without ACC found that when driving with ACC, participants drove faster, with smaller minimum headways, and applied larger force to the brakes (Hoedemaeker & Brookhuis 1998).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, a simulator study of 38 participants (age 25–60) who drove with and without ACC found that when driving with ACC, participants drove faster, with smaller minimum headways, and applied larger force to the brakes (Hoedemaeker & Brookhuis 1998). A study in Portugal compared drivers who were experienced users of ACC to people who were not (age 33–61) while driving in a simulator with and without ACC (Piccinini et al 2015). During the driving trials, participants were presented with a vehicle that was stopped on the roadway in front of them requiring them to brake to avoid a collision (note that ACC is not designed to automatically stop the vehicle in this situation, as the systems are not forward collision warning systems).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Use, perceptions, and benefits of automotive technologies among aging drivers

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Advanced in-vehicle technologies have been proposed as a potential way to keep older adults driving for as long as they can safely do so, by taking into account the common declines in functional abilities experienced by older adults. The purpose of this report was to synthesize the knowledge about older drivers and advanced in-vehicle technologies, focusing on three areas: use (how older drivers use these technologies), perception (what they think about the technologies), and outcomes (the safety and/or comfort benefits of the technologies). Twelve technologies were selected for review and grouped into three categories: crash avoidance systems (lane departure warning, curve speed warning, forward collision warning, blind spot warning, parking assistance); in-vehicle information systems (navigation assistance, intelligent speed adaptation); and other systems (adaptive cruise control, automatic crash notification, night vision enhancement, adaptive headlight, voice activated control). A comprehensive and systematic search was conducted for each technology to collect related publications. 271 articles were included into the final review. Research findings for each of the 12 technologies are synthesized in relation to how older adults use and think about the technologies as well as potential benefits. These results are presented separately for each technology. Can advanced in-vehicle technologies help extend the period over which an older adult can drive safely? This report answers this question with an optimistic “yes.” Some of the technologies reviewed in this report have been shown to help older drivers avoid crashes, improve the ease and comfort of driving, and travel to places and at times that they might normally avoid.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use, perceptions, and benefits of automotive technologies among aging drivers

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because drivers trust the system, they more easily exhibit risky driving behavior -the probability of an accident increases when using CC as compared to manual driving (Bianchi Piccini, Rodrigues, Leităo & Simőes, 2015). CC use influences traffic safety and it is also an important phenomenon that deserves to be studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Observation of risky driving behavior as a result of using in-vehicle technology in the Czech Republic

Zaoral¹,

Linkov²,

Drápela³

2017

ToTS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Functional limitations of the ACC that require a driver takeover have been shown to cause collisions in a driving simulator study [7]. Other studies have found that the type of functional limitation [10] and drivers' experience of using the automated driving system [11], [12] have an effect on the outcome of the takeover, whereas drivers' trust in the automation has been found to not influence the driver behavior during the takeover [12], [13]. Previous research on the safety of transitions from automated to manual driving has focused on assuring that the driver is aware of the transition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safe Transitions From Automated to Manual Driving Using Driver Controllability Estimation

Nilsson

Falcone

Vinter

2015

IEEE Trans. Intell. Transport. Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we consider the problem of assessing when the control of a vehicle can be safely transferred from an automated driving system to the driver. We propose a method based on a description of the driver's capabilities to maneuver the vehicle, which is defined as a subset of the vehicle's state space and called the driver controllability set (DCS). Since drivers' capabilities vary among individuals, the DCS is updated online during manual driving. By identifying the limits of the individual driver's normal driving envelope, we find the estimated bounds of the DCS. Using a vehicle model and reachability analysis, we assess whether the states of the vehicle start and remain within the DCS during the transition to manual driving. Only if the states are within the DCS is the transition to manual driving classified as safe. We demonstrate the estimation of the DCS for four drivers based on the data collected with real vehicles in highway and city driving. Experiments on transitions to manual driving are also conducted with real vehicles. Results show that the proposed method can be implemented with a real system to classify transitions from automated to manual driving.Index Terms-Driver capability, driver controllability set (DCS), driver modeling, driver takeover, safe transitions, vehicle automation.

show abstract

Reaction to a critical situation during driving with Adaptive Cruise Control for users and non-users of the system

Cited by 33 publications

References 34 publications

Use, perceptions, and benefits of automotive technologies among aging drivers

Use, perceptions, and benefits of automotive technologies among aging drivers

Observation of risky driving behavior as a result of using in-vehicle technology in the Czech Republic

Safe Transitions From Automated to Manual Driving Using Driver Controllability Estimation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About