在5670万英里的行驶中,按碰撞类型划分的Waymo Rider-Only碰撞率与人类基准的比较。

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, Tilia Gode, Trent Victor
{"title":"在5670万英里的行驶中,按碰撞类型划分的Waymo Rider-Only碰撞率与人类基准的比较。","authors":"Kristofer D Kusano, John M Scanlon, Yin-Hsiu Chen, Timothy L McMurry, Tilia Gode, Trent Victor","doi":"10.1080/15389588.2025.2499887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>SAE Level 4 Automated Driving Systems (ADSs) are deployed on public roads, including Waymo's Rider-Only (RO) ride-hailing service (without a driver behind the steering wheel). The objective of this study was to perform a retrospective safety assessment of Waymo's RO crash rate compared to human benchmarks, including disaggregated by crash type.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eleven crash type groups were identified from commonly relied upon crash typologies that are derived from human crash databases. Human benchmarks were developed from state vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and police-reported crash data. Benchmarks were aligned to the same vehicle types, road types, and locations as where the Waymo Driver operated. Waymo crashes were extracted from the NHTSA Standing General Order (SGO). RO mileage was provided by the company <i>via</i> a public website. Any-injury-reported, Airbag Deployment, and Suspected Serious Injury + crash outcomes were examined because they represented previously established, safety-relevant benchmarks where statistical testing could be performed at the current mileage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were examined over 56.7 million RO miles through the end of January 2025; resulting in a statistically significant lower crashed vehicle rate for all crashes compared to the benchmarks in Any-Injury-Reported and Airbag Deployment, and Suspected Serious Injury + crashes. Of the crash types, V2V Intersection crash events represented the largest total crash reduction, with a 96% reduction in Any-injury-reported (87-99% confidence interval) and a 91% reduction in Airbag Deployment (76-98% confidence interval) events. Cyclist, Motorcycle, Pedestrian, Secondary Crash, and Single Vehicle crashes were also statistically reduced for the Any-Injury-Reported outcome. There was no statistically significant disbenefit found in any of the 11 crash type groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study represents the first retrospective safety assessment of an RO ADS that made statistical conclusions about more serious crash outcomes (Airbag Deployment and Suspected Serious Injury+) and analyzed crash rates on a crash type basis. The crash type breakdown applied in the current analysis provides unique insight into the direction and magnitude of safety impact being achieved by a currently deployed ADS system. This work should be considered by stakeholders, regulators, and other ADS companies aiming to objectively evaluate the safety impact of ADS technology.</p>","PeriodicalId":54422,"journal":{"name":"Traffic Injury Prevention","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Waymo Rider-Only crash rates by crash type to human benchmarks at 56.7 million miles.\",\"authors\":\"Kristofer D Kusano, John M Scanlon, Yin-Hsiu Chen, Timothy L McMurry, Tilia Gode, Trent Victor\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15389588.2025.2499887\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>SAE Level 4 Automated Driving Systems (ADSs) are deployed on public roads, including Waymo's Rider-Only (RO) ride-hailing service (without a driver behind the steering wheel). The objective of this study was to perform a retrospective safety assessment of Waymo's RO crash rate compared to human benchmarks, including disaggregated by crash type.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Eleven crash type groups were identified from commonly relied upon crash typologies that are derived from human crash databases. Human benchmarks were developed from state vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and police-reported crash data. Benchmarks were aligned to the same vehicle types, road types, and locations as where the Waymo Driver operated. Waymo crashes were extracted from the NHTSA Standing General Order (SGO). RO mileage was provided by the company <i>via</i> a public website. Any-injury-reported, Airbag Deployment, and Suspected Serious Injury + crash outcomes were examined because they represented previously established, safety-relevant benchmarks where statistical testing could be performed at the current mileage.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were examined over 56.7 million RO miles through the end of January 2025; resulting in a statistically significant lower crashed vehicle rate for all crashes compared to the benchmarks in Any-Injury-Reported and Airbag Deployment, and Suspected Serious Injury + crashes. Of the crash types, V2V Intersection crash events represented the largest total crash reduction, with a 96% reduction in Any-injury-reported (87-99% confidence interval) and a 91% reduction in Airbag Deployment (76-98% confidence interval) events. Cyclist, Motorcycle, Pedestrian, Secondary Crash, and Single Vehicle crashes were also statistically reduced for the Any-Injury-Reported outcome. There was no statistically significant disbenefit found in any of the 11 crash type groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study represents the first retrospective safety assessment of an RO ADS that made statistical conclusions about more serious crash outcomes (Airbag Deployment and Suspected Serious Injury+) and analyzed crash rates on a crash type basis. The crash type breakdown applied in the current analysis provides unique insight into the direction and magnitude of safety impact being achieved by a currently deployed ADS system. This work should be considered by stakeholders, regulators, and other ADS companies aiming to objectively evaluate the safety impact of ADS technology.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54422,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Traffic Injury Prevention\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Traffic Injury Prevention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2025.2499887\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Traffic Injury Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15389588.2025.2499887","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

摘要

目标:在公共道路上部署SAE 4级自动驾驶系统(ads),包括Waymo的Rider-Only (RO)叫车服务(没有司机坐在方向盘后面)。本研究的目的是对Waymo的RO碰撞率与人类基准进行回顾性安全评估,包括按碰撞类型分类。方法:从通常依赖的碰撞类型学中识别出11种碰撞类型组,这些类型学来源于人类碰撞数据库。人类基准是根据国家车辆行驶里程(VMT)和警方报告的碰撞数据制定的。基准测试与Waymo驾驶员驾驶的车辆类型、道路类型和地点保持一致。Waymo的事故是从NHTSA的常规命令(SGO)中提取的。RO里程由公司通过公共网站提供。对任何受伤报告、安全气囊部署和疑似严重伤害+碰撞结果进行了检查,因为它们代表了先前建立的安全相关基准,可以在当前里程下进行统计测试。结果:截至2025年1月底,研究人员对5670万英里的RO里程进行了数据分析;与“任何伤害报告”和“安全气囊部署”以及“疑似严重伤害+碰撞”的基准相比,在统计上显著降低了所有碰撞的碰撞率。在碰撞类型中,V2V路口碰撞事件代表了最大的总碰撞减少,任何伤害报告减少96%(87-99%置信区间),安全气囊展开事件减少91%(76-98%置信区间)。骑车人、摩托车、行人、二次碰撞和单一车辆碰撞也在统计上减少了任何伤害报告的结果。在11个崩溃类型组中,没有发现统计学上显著的不利影响。结论:本研究首次对RO ADS进行了回顾性安全评估,得出了更严重碰撞结果(安全气囊展开和疑似严重伤害+)的统计结论,并分析了碰撞类型基础上的碰撞率。当前分析中应用的碰撞类型细分为当前部署的ADS系统所实现的安全影响的方向和程度提供了独特的见解。利益相关者、监管机构和其他旨在客观评估ADS技术安全影响的ADS公司应该考虑这项工作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of Waymo Rider-Only crash rates by crash type to human benchmarks at 56.7 million miles.

Objective: SAE Level 4 Automated Driving Systems (ADSs) are deployed on public roads, including Waymo's Rider-Only (RO) ride-hailing service (without a driver behind the steering wheel). The objective of this study was to perform a retrospective safety assessment of Waymo's RO crash rate compared to human benchmarks, including disaggregated by crash type.

Methods: Eleven crash type groups were identified from commonly relied upon crash typologies that are derived from human crash databases. Human benchmarks were developed from state vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and police-reported crash data. Benchmarks were aligned to the same vehicle types, road types, and locations as where the Waymo Driver operated. Waymo crashes were extracted from the NHTSA Standing General Order (SGO). RO mileage was provided by the company via a public website. Any-injury-reported, Airbag Deployment, and Suspected Serious Injury + crash outcomes were examined because they represented previously established, safety-relevant benchmarks where statistical testing could be performed at the current mileage.

Results: Data were examined over 56.7 million RO miles through the end of January 2025; resulting in a statistically significant lower crashed vehicle rate for all crashes compared to the benchmarks in Any-Injury-Reported and Airbag Deployment, and Suspected Serious Injury + crashes. Of the crash types, V2V Intersection crash events represented the largest total crash reduction, with a 96% reduction in Any-injury-reported (87-99% confidence interval) and a 91% reduction in Airbag Deployment (76-98% confidence interval) events. Cyclist, Motorcycle, Pedestrian, Secondary Crash, and Single Vehicle crashes were also statistically reduced for the Any-Injury-Reported outcome. There was no statistically significant disbenefit found in any of the 11 crash type groups.

Conclusions: This study represents the first retrospective safety assessment of an RO ADS that made statistical conclusions about more serious crash outcomes (Airbag Deployment and Suspected Serious Injury+) and analyzed crash rates on a crash type basis. The crash type breakdown applied in the current analysis provides unique insight into the direction and magnitude of safety impact being achieved by a currently deployed ADS system. This work should be considered by stakeholders, regulators, and other ADS companies aiming to objectively evaluate the safety impact of ADS technology.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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