Hazard analysis of an Automated Lane Keeping System using Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis

IF 6.2 1区 工程技术 Q1 ERGONOMICS
Mariat James Elizebeth, Siddartha Khastgir, Paul Jennings
{"title":"Hazard analysis of an Automated Lane Keeping System using Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis","authors":"Mariat James Elizebeth,&nbsp;Siddartha Khastgir,&nbsp;Paul Jennings","doi":"10.1016/j.aap.2025.108171","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) is an effective safety analysis technique that identifies how unsafe interactions among components within a complex system may result in accidents. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of STPA by applying it to an Automated Lane Keeping System (ALKS). The goal was to explore areas of potential risk in the system and make recommendations on how overall system safety could be improved. The STPA analysis of ALKS identified 87 Unsafe Control Actions (UCAs) based on interactions between the various components. An analysis of the UCAs revealed 537 causal factors (CFs), including software faults like flawed control algorithms and conflicting controls, sensor performance limitations, specification issues such as missing feedback signals, and errors in human–machine interaction, such as excessive dependence on the ALKS and drivers having incorrect expectations regarding ALKS operation. 1074 requirements were proposed to prevent or mitigate these causal factors, such as educating drivers about both the benefits and limitations of the ALKS to ensure safe use. The results highlighted the importance of communicating both the capabilities as well as the limitations of modern complex systems to the users to guarantee safety. This study, which is the first comprehensive application of STPA to ALKS, identified gaps with existing regulatory requirements for ALKS, and 87 recommendations were made to bridge these gaps. Our research has shown that this top-down, well-structured, and holistic method can especially be advantageous for regulators and policymakers to formulate requirements and policies to deploy and operate complex, innovative technologies, safely.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":6926,"journal":{"name":"Accident; analysis and prevention","volume":"221 ","pages":"Article 108171"},"PeriodicalIF":6.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accident; analysis and prevention","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000145752500257X","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ERGONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Systems-Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) is an effective safety analysis technique that identifies how unsafe interactions among components within a complex system may result in accidents. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of STPA by applying it to an Automated Lane Keeping System (ALKS). The goal was to explore areas of potential risk in the system and make recommendations on how overall system safety could be improved. The STPA analysis of ALKS identified 87 Unsafe Control Actions (UCAs) based on interactions between the various components. An analysis of the UCAs revealed 537 causal factors (CFs), including software faults like flawed control algorithms and conflicting controls, sensor performance limitations, specification issues such as missing feedback signals, and errors in human–machine interaction, such as excessive dependence on the ALKS and drivers having incorrect expectations regarding ALKS operation. 1074 requirements were proposed to prevent or mitigate these causal factors, such as educating drivers about both the benefits and limitations of the ALKS to ensure safe use. The results highlighted the importance of communicating both the capabilities as well as the limitations of modern complex systems to the users to guarantee safety. This study, which is the first comprehensive application of STPA to ALKS, identified gaps with existing regulatory requirements for ALKS, and 87 recommendations were made to bridge these gaps. Our research has shown that this top-down, well-structured, and holistic method can especially be advantageous for regulators and policymakers to formulate requirements and policies to deploy and operate complex, innovative technologies, safely.
基于系统理论过程分析的自动车道保持系统危害分析
系统理论过程分析(STPA)是一种有效的安全分析技术,用于识别复杂系统中组件之间的不安全相互作用如何导致事故。本研究旨在通过将STPA应用于自动车道保持系统(ALKS)来评估其有效性。目标是探索系统中潜在风险的领域,并就如何改进整体系统安全性提出建议。STPA对ALKS的分析基于各个组件之间的相互作用确定了87个不安全控制动作(UCAs)。对无人驾驶汽车的分析揭示了537个原因(cf),包括软件故障,如有缺陷的控制算法和冲突的控制,传感器性能限制,规范问题,如缺少反馈信号,人机交互错误,如过度依赖自动驾驶系统和驾驶员对自动驾驶系统的操作有不正确的期望。1074提出了防止或减轻这些因果因素的要求,例如教育驾驶员关于自动驾驶汽车的好处和局限性,以确保安全使用。结果强调了向用户传达现代复杂系统的功能和局限性以保证安全的重要性。本研究首次将STPA全面应用于ALKS,确定了ALKS与现有监管要求之间的差距,并提出了87项建议以弥合这些差距。我们的研究表明,这种自上而下、结构良好、整体的方法尤其有利于监管机构和政策制定者制定要求和政策,以安全部署和操作复杂的创新技术。
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
CiteScore
11.90
自引率
16.90%
发文量
264
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: Accident Analysis & Prevention provides wide coverage of the general areas relating to accidental injury and damage, including the pre-injury and immediate post-injury phases. Published papers deal with medical, legal, economic, educational, behavioral, theoretical or empirical aspects of transportation accidents, as well as with accidents at other sites. Selected topics within the scope of the Journal may include: studies of human, environmental and vehicular factors influencing the occurrence, type and severity of accidents and injury; the design, implementation and evaluation of countermeasures; biomechanics of impact and human tolerance limits to injury; modelling and statistical analysis of accident data; policy, planning and decision-making in safety.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信