Advertisement

Technical Evaluation and Impact Assessment of Automated Driving

  • Felix FahrenkrogEmail author
  • Christian Rösener
  • Adrian Zlocki
  • Lutz Eckstein
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mobility book series (LNMOB)

Abstract

Currently different research activities on automated driving are conducted around the globe. The European flagship research project on automated driving functions is the research project “AdaptIVe” (Automated Driving Applications and Technologies for Intelligent Vehicles). Besides the development of automated driving functions, the project deals with general research on legal aspects, human factors and evaluation. The evaluation and impact assessment of automated driving functions faces different challenges considering the complexity of the technology. In this context, this paper describes the evaluation approaches that are taken in the project for the technical evaluation and impact assessment.

Keywords

AdaptIVe Evaluation Technical assessment Impact assessment 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Commission Seventh Framework Program under the project AdaptIVe, grant agreement number 610428. The authors would like to thank all partners within AdaptIVe for their cooperation and valuable contribution. In particular the authors want to thank the partners of the Evaluation SP, namely BAST, BMW, CTAG, CRF, TNO and Lund University.

References

  1. 1.
    Rowsome F (1958) What it’s like to drive an auto-pilot car. Popular Science Monthly, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    NN Report to Congress, DARPA Prize Authority, DARPA, 2006Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    NN DARPA Urban challenge Media. DARPA urban challenge, http://archive.darpa.mil/grandchallenge/, 2014
  4. 4.
    Markoff J (2010) Google cars drive themselves. The New York TimesGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ziegler J, Bender P, Schreiber M et al (2014) Making Bertha drive – an autonomous journey on a historic route. IEEE Intell Transp Syst Mag 6(2)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ploeg J, Shladover S, Nijmeijer H et al (2012) Introduction to the special issue on the 2011 grand cooperative driving challenge. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 13(3)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Etemad A, Bartels A (2014) A stepwise market introduction of automated driving. In: 21st ITS World Congress, DetroitGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    NN Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to On-Road Automated Motor Vehicles, SAE document J3016, 2014Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Knapp A (2015) Legal issues addressed in the EU funded AdaptIVe project. In: 22nd ITS World Congress, Bordeaux, 2015Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johansson E (2014) Human factors in vehicle automation - activities in the European project AdaptIVe. VRA WebinarGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dávila A (2012) Validation test plan and results. SARTRE, Deliverable D4.1 & 4.2Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beutner A, Pettersson S, Seglö F et al (2011) Optimized and validated demonstration vehicles. HAVEit, Deliverable D13.1Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deutchle S (2006) Das KONVOI-Projekt – Entwicklung und Untersuchung des Einsatzes von elektischen LKW-Konvois auf Autobahnen, 15. Aachner KolloquiumGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    NN Adoption of the Project Management Institute (PMI®) Standard A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide)–4th edn. IEEE Guide, vol 2011Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karabatsou V, Pappas M, Elslande P et al (2006) A-priori evaluation of safety functions effectiveness – Methodologies, Trace, Deliverable D4.1.3Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fahrenkrog F, Zlocki A, Dobberstein J et al (2013) Impact assessment of developed application – overall interactive assessment, interactIVe, deliverable D7.5Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilmink I, Janssen W, Jonkers E et al (2008) Impact assessment of intelligent vehicle safety systems. eIMPACT, Deliverable D4Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Scholliers J, Hendirks F, Aust ML et al (2008) Project final report and recommendation for future assessments. PReVAL project, Deliverable DL IP D12/D16.4Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rodarius C, Duflis J, Fahrenkrog F, et al (2015) Test and evaluation plan. AdaptIVe Deliverable D7.1Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wachenfeld W, Winner H (2015) Die Freigabe des autonomen Fahrens, Autonomes Fahren, Technische, rechtliche und gesellschaftliche Aspekte. Springer ViewegGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Larsson P, Esberg I, van Noort M (2012) Test and evaluation plans. interactIVe Deliverable D7.4Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kessler C, Etemad A, Alessandretti G (2012) Final Report, euroFOT, Deliverable D11.3Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Benmimoun M, Fahrenkrog F, Zlocki A, Eckstein L (2012) Detection and classification of critical events by means of vehicle data. ATZ Worldwide 114(10):60–66Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Reichel M, Botsch M, Rauschecker R, Siedersberger KH et al (2010) Situation aspect modeling and classification using a scenario based random forest algorithm for convoy merging situations. In: 13th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2010, pp 360–366Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Page Y, Fahrenkrog F, Fiorentino A et al (2015) A comprehensive and harmonized method for assessing the effectiveness of advanced driver assistance systems by virtual simulation: the PEARS initiative. In: 24th international technical conference on the enhanced safety of vehicles (ESV)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fahrenkrog F, Zlocki A, Eckstein L (2014) Bewertung aktive Sicherheitssysteme vom Test zur Wirksamkeitsanalyse. Automobiltechnische Zeitschrift 01Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Eckstein L, Zlocki A (2013) Safety potential of ADAS – combined methods for an effective evaluation, 23rd ESVGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zlocki A, Eckstein L, Fahrenkrog F (2015) Evaluation and sign-off methodology for automated vehicle systems based on relevant driving situations. In: 94th Annual TRB Meeting, Washington D.C.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Felix Fahrenkrog
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christian Rösener
    • 1
  • Adrian Zlocki
    • 2
  • Lutz Eckstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für KraftfahrzeugeRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany
  2. 2.fka Forschungsgesellschaft Kraftfahrwesen mbH AachenAachenGermany

Personalised recommendations