Comparison of Waymo rider-only crash data to human benchmarks at 7.1 million miles

IF 1.6 3区 工程技术 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Kristofer D. Kusano , John M. Scanlon , Yin-Hsiu Chen , Timothy L. McMurry , Ruoshu Chen , Tilia Gode , Trent Victor
{"title":"Comparison of Waymo rider-only crash data to human benchmarks at 7.1 million miles","authors":"Kristofer D. Kusano ,&nbsp;John M. Scanlon ,&nbsp;Yin-Hsiu Chen ,&nbsp;Timothy L. McMurry ,&nbsp;Ruoshu Chen ,&nbsp;Tilia Gode ,&nbsp;Trent Victor","doi":"10.1080/15389588.2024.2380786","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This article examines the safety performance of the Waymo Driver, an SAE level 4 automated driving system (ADS) used in a rider-only (RO) ride-hailing application without a human driver, either in the vehicle or remotely.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>ADS crash data were derived from NHTSA’s Standing General Order (SGO) reporting over 7.14 million RO miles through the end of October 2023 in Phoenix, Arizona, San Francisco, California, and Los Angeles, California, and compared to human benchmarks from the literature.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>When considering all locations together, the <em>any injury reported</em> crashed vehicle rate was 0.6 incidents per million miles (IPMM) for the ADS vs. 2.80 IPMM for the human benchmark, an 80% reduction or a human crash rate that is 5 times higher than the ADS rate. <em>Police-reported</em> crashed vehicle rates for all locations together were 2.1 IPMM for the ADS vs. 4.68 IPMM for the human benchmark, a 55% reduction or a human crash rate that was 2.2 times higher than the ADS rate. <em>Police-reported</em> crashed vehicle rate reductions for the ADS were statistically significant when compared in San Francisco and Phoenix, as well as combined across all locations and the any-injury-reported reductions were statistically significant in San Francisco and in all locations. The <em>any property damage or injury</em> comparison had statistically significant decreases in 3 comparisons but also nonsignificant results in 3 other benchmarks. When excluding ADS crashes with a delta-V less than 1 mph (a measure of sensitivity to lower reporting threshold), about half of the ADS collisions were excluded, resulting in comparisons that showed a large statistically significant reduction in all comparisons except for one comparison from San Francisco.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The statistically significant reductions in <em>police-reported</em> and <em>any injury reported</em> crash rates indicate a promising positive safety impact of ADS. The direction and significance of comparisons in the <em>any property damage or injury</em> outcome group are inconclusive due to difficulties in estimating a matching human benchmark. More research is needed on defining <em>any property damage or injury</em> benchmarks with clear lower reporting thresholds to reduce the systematic uncertainty in the benchmark rates. Together, these crash rate results contribute to the continuous growth in confidence, together with other methodologies, in a safety case approach.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54422,"journal":{"name":"Traffic Injury Prevention","volume":"25 1","pages":"Pages S66-S77"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Traffic Injury Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S1538958824001413","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This article examines the safety performance of the Waymo Driver, an SAE level 4 automated driving system (ADS) used in a rider-only (RO) ride-hailing application without a human driver, either in the vehicle or remotely.

Methods

ADS crash data were derived from NHTSA’s Standing General Order (SGO) reporting over 7.14 million RO miles through the end of October 2023 in Phoenix, Arizona, San Francisco, California, and Los Angeles, California, and compared to human benchmarks from the literature.

Results

When considering all locations together, the any injury reported crashed vehicle rate was 0.6 incidents per million miles (IPMM) for the ADS vs. 2.80 IPMM for the human benchmark, an 80% reduction or a human crash rate that is 5 times higher than the ADS rate. Police-reported crashed vehicle rates for all locations together were 2.1 IPMM for the ADS vs. 4.68 IPMM for the human benchmark, a 55% reduction or a human crash rate that was 2.2 times higher than the ADS rate. Police-reported crashed vehicle rate reductions for the ADS were statistically significant when compared in San Francisco and Phoenix, as well as combined across all locations and the any-injury-reported reductions were statistically significant in San Francisco and in all locations. The any property damage or injury comparison had statistically significant decreases in 3 comparisons but also nonsignificant results in 3 other benchmarks. When excluding ADS crashes with a delta-V less than 1 mph (a measure of sensitivity to lower reporting threshold), about half of the ADS collisions were excluded, resulting in comparisons that showed a large statistically significant reduction in all comparisons except for one comparison from San Francisco.

Conclusions

The statistically significant reductions in police-reported and any injury reported crash rates indicate a promising positive safety impact of ADS. The direction and significance of comparisons in the any property damage or injury outcome group are inconclusive due to difficulties in estimating a matching human benchmark. More research is needed on defining any property damage or injury benchmarks with clear lower reporting thresholds to reduce the systematic uncertainty in the benchmark rates. Together, these crash rate results contribute to the continuous growth in confidence, together with other methodologies, in a safety case approach.
在 710 万英里的里程数上,Waymo 骑手专用碰撞数据与人类基准数据的比较。
目标:本文研究了Waymo Driver的安全性能,Waymo Driver是一种SAE 4级自动驾驶系统(ADS),用于乘客专享(RO)打车应用,车内或远程均无人类驾驶员:ADS 碰撞数据来自 NHTSA 的常备通令(SGO),报告了亚利桑那州凤凰城、加利福尼亚州旧金山和加利福尼亚州洛杉矶到 2023 年 10 月底超过 714 万英里的 RO 里程,并与文献中的人类基准进行了比较:综合考虑所有地点,ADS 的任何伤害报告撞车率为每百万英里 0.6 起(IPMM),而人类基准为每百万英里 2.80 起(IPMM),减少了 80%,即人类撞车率是 ADS 撞车率的 5 倍。警方报告的所有地点的撞车率合计为:ADS 为 2.1 IPMM,而人类基准为 4.68 IPMM,减少了 55%,即人类撞车率是 ADS 撞车率的 2.2 倍。在旧金山和凤凰城以及所有地点的综合比较中,警方报告的 ADS 撞车率降低幅度在统计上具有显著性,而在旧金山和所有地点,任何伤害报告的降低幅度在统计上具有显著性。任何财产损失或伤害比较在 3 次比较中均有统计意义上的显著下降,但在另外 3 次基准比较中结果也不显著。在排除Δ-V 小于 1 英里/小时的 ADS 碰撞事故(这是对较低报告阈值敏感性的一种衡量标准)时,约有一半的 ADS 碰撞事故被排除在外,结果显示,除旧金山的一项比较外,其他所有比较在统计意义上都有大幅下降:警方报告的撞车率和任何受伤报告的撞车率在统计上都有明显下降,这表明 ADS 对安全产生了积极影响。由于难以估计匹配的人类基准,任何财产损失或伤害结果组的比较方向和意义尚无定论。还需要进行更多的研究,以明确较低的报告阈值来定义任何财产损失或伤害基准,从而减少基准率的系统不确定性。总之,这些碰撞率结果有助于不断增强人们对安全案例方法以及其他方法的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Traffic Injury Prevention
Traffic Injury Prevention PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
137
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The purpose of Traffic Injury Prevention is to bridge the disciplines of medicine, engineering, public health and traffic safety in order to foster the science of traffic injury prevention. The archival journal focuses on research, interventions and evaluations within the areas of traffic safety, crash causation, injury prevention and treatment. General topics within the journal''s scope are driver behavior, road infrastructure, emerging crash avoidance technologies, crash and injury epidemiology, alcohol and drugs, impact injury biomechanics, vehicle crashworthiness, occupant restraints, pedestrian safety, evaluation of interventions, economic consequences and emergency and clinical care with specific application to traffic injury prevention. The journal includes full length papers, review articles, case studies, brief technical notes and commentaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信