Rethinking Advanced Driver Assistance System taxonomies: A framework and inventory of real-world safety performance

IF 3.9 Q2 TRANSPORTATION

Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.trip.2025.101336

Ksander N de Winkel, Michiel Christoph

{"title":"Rethinking Advanced Driver Assistance System taxonomies: A framework and inventory of real-world safety performance","authors":"Ksander N de Winkel, Michiel Christoph","doi":"10.1016/j.trip.2025.101336","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In this review, we assess the real-world effectiveness of <strong>ADAS!</strong> (<strong>ADAS!</strong>) in preventing vehicle crashes. We propose a new, data-driven framework of safety performance based on dimensions <em>urgency</em> and <em>level of control</em> as an alternative to existing taxonomies.</div><div>We identified 28 <strong>ADAS!</strong> and collected data on (real-world) safety performance of from grey (technical reports) and white (scientific) literature. <strong>ADAS!</strong> were categorized by <em>functional class</em> (longitudinal/lateral control, monitoring, information systems) and by <em>interaction type</em> (informing, warning, intervening, comfort-enhancing).</div><div>The data analysis showed that <strong>LKA!</strong> (<strong>LKA!</strong>) (−19.1%) and <strong>DMS!</strong> (<strong>DMS!</strong>) (−14%) had the strongest crash rate reduction effects, followed by <strong>AEB!</strong> (<strong>AEB!</strong>) (−10.7%). However, systems like <strong>ACC!</strong> (<strong>ACC!</strong>) and <strong>CC!</strong> (<strong>CC!</strong>) were associated with increased crash rates (+8%, +12%). Categorizing systems by either functional class or interaction type revealed central tendencies favoring safety of longitudinal control and intervening systems, while comfort-enhancing systems showed detrimental effects.</div><div>From the categorizations, we derived dimensions <em>urgency</em> and <em>level of control</em>, scoring individual <strong>ADAS!</strong> accordingly. A linear model based on these dimensions (pseudo-<span><math><mrow><msup><mrow><mi>R</mi></mrow><mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow></msup><mo>=</mo><mn>0</mn><mo>.</mo><mn>103</mn></mrow></math></span>) explained a similar amount of variance as the categorizations (functional class: 0.140, interaction type: 0.087). The analysis indicated that low <em>urgency</em> and high <em>level of control</em>, typical of comfort-enhancing systems, did not improve safety.</div><div>Our findings support the positive safety effects of <strong>ADAS!</strong>, but also point to risks, particularly for comfort-enhancing technologies. The proposed framework offers an explanation for the observations. It is simple and generalizable, and avoids disadvantages inherent to categorical classifications, making it a potentially valuable tool for designers and policymakers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36621,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","volume":"29 ","pages":"Article 101336"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198225000156","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this review, we assess the real-world effectiveness of ADAS! (ADAS!) in preventing vehicle crashes. We propose a new, data-driven framework of safety performance based on dimensions urgency and level of control as an alternative to existing taxonomies.

We identified 28 ADAS! and collected data on (real-world) safety performance of from grey (technical reports) and white (scientific) literature. ADAS! were categorized by functional class (longitudinal/lateral control, monitoring, information systems) and by interaction type (informing, warning, intervening, comfort-enhancing).

The data analysis showed that LKA! (LKA!) (−19.1%) and DMS! (DMS!) (−14%) had the strongest crash rate reduction effects, followed by AEB! (AEB!) (−10.7%). However, systems like ACC! (ACC!) and CC! (CC!) were associated with increased crash rates (+8%, +12%). Categorizing systems by either functional class or interaction type revealed central tendencies favoring safety of longitudinal control and intervening systems, while comfort-enhancing systems showed detrimental effects.

From the categorizations, we derived dimensions urgency and level of control, scoring individual ADAS! accordingly. A linear model based on these dimensions (pseudo-

R^{2} = 0.103

) explained a similar amount of variance as the categorizations (functional class: 0.140, interaction type: 0.087). The analysis indicated that low urgency and high level of control, typical of comfort-enhancing systems, did not improve safety.

Our findings support the positive safety effects of ADAS!, but also point to risks, particularly for comfort-enhancing technologies. The proposed framework offers an explanation for the observations. It is simple and generalizable, and avoids disadvantages inherent to categorical classifications, making it a potentially valuable tool for designers and policymakers.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊