Abstract
This chapter presents a summary of AVS 2017 Breakout Session 13, Challenges and Opportunities for the Intersection of Vulnerable Road Users (VRUs) and AVs. This session built upon a brief session in AVS 2016 devoted to reducing conflict between VRUs and automated vehicles [1]. As last year’s brief session resulted in significant engagement and discussion, this year’s session was expanded to a full afternoon to broaden the scope of presentation topics and discussion. Nine speakers presented on a range of issues related to the intersection of VRUs and AVs, ranging from lessons from the real world, to themes in human factors, to simulation and urban planning considerations. The session was organized around two main panel themes, focused on Vulnerable Road User Safety Needs and Concerns and Technology, Infrastructure and Policy Considerations. Significant discussion during and following the formal presentations resulted in identification of a range of research needs, including in the domains of AV design and human factors research, communications, legal and ethical questions, and data requirements.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Owens JM, Greene-Roesel R, Habibovic A, Head L, Apricio A (2017) Reducing conflict between vulnerable road users and automated vehicles. In: Meyer G, Beiker S (eds) Road vehicle automation 4. Springer, Cham, pp 69–75
NHTSA (2017, February) Traffic safety facts: pedestrians (Report no. DOT HS 812 375). US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
Tyrrell RA, Wood JM, Carberry TP (2004) On-road measures of pedestrians’ estimates of their own nighttime conspicuity. J Saf Res 35(5):483–490
Wood JM, Tyrrell RA, Marszalek RP, Lacherez PF, Carberry TP, Chu BS, King MJ (2010) Cyclist visibility at night: perceptions of visibility do not necessarily match reality. J Australas College Road Saf 21(3):56–60
Fambro DB, Fitzpatrick K, Koppa RJ (1997) Determination of stopping sight distances (NCHRP Report 400). Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC
Sandt L, Owens JM (2017) Discussion Guide for Automated and Connected Vehicles, Pedestrians, and Bicyclists. Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center, Chapel Hill, NC
NHTSA (2017) Automated driving systems 2.0: a vision for safety. DOT HS 812 442. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13069a-ads2.0_090617_v9a_tag.pdf
Best A, Narang S, Barber D, Manocha D (2017) AutonoVi: autonomous vehicle planning with dynamic maneuvers and traffic constraints. In: Proceedings of IROS 2017
Suppé A, Navarro-Serment L, Steinfeld A (2010) Semi-autonomous virtual valet parking. In: Proceedings of the second international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications (AutomotiveUI)
Burgess HJ (2004) Futurama, Autogeddon: imagining the superhighway from Bel Geddes to Ballard. Rhizomes: Cult Stud Emergent Knowl 8:31
Corbusier L (1967) The radiant city: Elements of a doctrine of urbanism to be used as the basis of our machine-age civilization. Orion Press
Wright FL (1932) Broadacre city: an architect’s vision
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Owens, J.M. et al. (2019). Challenges and Opportunities for the Intersection of Vulnerable Road Users (VRU) and Automated Vehicles (AVs). In: Meyer, G., Beiker, S. (eds) Road Vehicle Automation 5. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94896-6_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94896-6_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94895-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94896-6
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)