John M Scanlon, Eric R Teoh, David G Kidd, Kristofer D Kusano, Jonas Bärgman, Geoffrey Chi-Johnston, Luigi Di Lillo, Francesca M Favarò, Carol A Flannagan, Henrik Liers, Bonnie Lin, Magdalena Lindman, Shane McLaughlin, Miguel A Perez, Trent Victor
{"title":"RAVE checklist: Recommendations for overcoming challenges in retrospective safety studies of automated driving systems.","authors":"John M Scanlon, Eric R Teoh, David G Kidd, Kristofer D Kusano, Jonas Bärgman, Geoffrey Chi-Johnston, Luigi Di Lillo, Francesca M Favarò, Carol A Flannagan, Henrik Liers, Bonnie Lin, Magdalena Lindman, Shane McLaughlin, Miguel A Perez, Trent Victor","doi":"10.1080/15389588.2024.2435620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The public, regulators, and domain experts alike seek to understand the effect of deployed SAE level 4 automated driving system (ADS) technologies on safety. The recent expansion of ADS technology deployments is paving the way for early stage safety impact evaluations, whereby the observational data from both an ADS and a representative benchmark fleet are compared to quantify safety performance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In January 2024; a working group of experts across academia, insurance, and industry came together in Washington, DC to discuss the current and future challenges in performing such evaluations. A subset of this working group then met, virtually, on multiple occasions to produce this paper.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This paper presents the RAVE (Retrospective Automated Vehicle Evaluation) checklist, a set of fifteen recommendations for performing and evaluating retrospective ADS performance comparisons. The recommendations are centered around the concepts of (1) quality and validity, (2) transparency, and (3) interpretation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Over time, it is anticipated there will be a large and varied body of work evaluating the observed performance of these ADS fleets. Establishing and promoting good scientific practices benefits the work of stakeholders, many of whom may not be subject matter experts. This working group's intentions are to: i) strengthen individual research studies and ii) make the at-large community more informed on how to evaluate this collective body of work.</p>","PeriodicalId":54422,"journal":{"name":"Traffic Injury Prevention","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","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/10.1080/15389588.2024.2435620","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
Objective: The public, regulators, and domain experts alike seek to understand the effect of deployed SAE level 4 automated driving system (ADS) technologies on safety. The recent expansion of ADS technology deployments is paving the way for early stage safety impact evaluations, whereby the observational data from both an ADS and a representative benchmark fleet are compared to quantify safety performance.
Methods: In January 2024; a working group of experts across academia, insurance, and industry came together in Washington, DC to discuss the current and future challenges in performing such evaluations. A subset of this working group then met, virtually, on multiple occasions to produce this paper.
Results: This paper presents the RAVE (Retrospective Automated Vehicle Evaluation) checklist, a set of fifteen recommendations for performing and evaluating retrospective ADS performance comparisons. The recommendations are centered around the concepts of (1) quality and validity, (2) transparency, and (3) interpretation.
Conclusion: Over time, it is anticipated there will be a large and varied body of work evaluating the observed performance of these ADS fleets. Establishing and promoting good scientific practices benefits the work of stakeholders, many of whom may not be subject matter experts. This working group's intentions are to: i) strengthen individual research studies and ii) make the at-large community more informed on how to evaluate this collective body of work.
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.