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}
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.
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.