基于不同驾驶场景下 RSS 模型校准的卡车 FCW 误报警报评估

{"title":"基于不同驾驶场景下 RSS 模型校准的卡车 FCW 误报警报评估","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ijtst.2023.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Advanced driver-assistance systems (ADASs), such as forward collision warning (FCW), are widely used and, in some countries, have been made mandatory for commercial vehicles. In practical applications, however, FCW systems produce many false alarms. Using scenario and driving behavior data collected from naturalistic driving study data of trucks, a variable threshold evaluation method was proposed to determine the factors correlating with false alarms. A total of 450 collision avoidance events were divided based on driving characteristics into three groups with <em>k</em>-means clustering. Responsibility-sensitive safety (RSS) model’s parameters were calibrated with the driving behavior characteristics and scenarios to evaluate the truck FCW system’s alarm accuracy. The evaluation of the results of truck FCW system based on RSS model found 47 false alarm alarms in the 450 events, a false alarm rate of 11.19%. When the following distance was close (&lt;7 m) or far (&gt;20 m), the false alarm rate reached more than 30%. The minimum time to collision (TTC) in the close distance driving clusters (DCs) (5.81 s) was lower than that in long distance DCs (7.68 s and 9.46 s). Braking force in the low-speed DCs (deceleration at −0.16 g and −0.55 g) was lower than in high-speeded DC (deceleration = −1.21 g). The FCW system does not conform to the driver's reaction time and braking characteristics in different scenarios, and is the main reason for false alarms. This is more obviously reflected in low-speed short distance and high-speed long-distance scenarios.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":52282,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology","volume":"15 ","pages":"Pages 35-50"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of false alarm alarms in truck FCW based on calibration of RSS model under different driving scenarios\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijtst.2023.07.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Advanced driver-assistance systems (ADASs), such as forward collision warning (FCW), are widely used and, in some countries, have been made mandatory for commercial vehicles. In practical applications, however, FCW systems produce many false alarms. Using scenario and driving behavior data collected from naturalistic driving study data of trucks, a variable threshold evaluation method was proposed to determine the factors correlating with false alarms. A total of 450 collision avoidance events were divided based on driving characteristics into three groups with <em>k</em>-means clustering. Responsibility-sensitive safety (RSS) model’s parameters were calibrated with the driving behavior characteristics and scenarios to evaluate the truck FCW system’s alarm accuracy. The evaluation of the results of truck FCW system based on RSS model found 47 false alarm alarms in the 450 events, a false alarm rate of 11.19%. When the following distance was close (&lt;7 m) or far (&gt;20 m), the false alarm rate reached more than 30%. The minimum time to collision (TTC) in the close distance driving clusters (DCs) (5.81 s) was lower than that in long distance DCs (7.68 s and 9.46 s). Braking force in the low-speed DCs (deceleration at −0.16 g and −0.55 g) was lower than in high-speeded DC (deceleration = −1.21 g). The FCW system does not conform to the driver's reaction time and braking characteristics in different scenarios, and is the main reason for false alarms. This is more obviously reflected in low-speed short distance and high-speed long-distance scenarios.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52282,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 35-50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2046043023000655\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPORTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2046043023000655","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

摘要

先进驾驶辅助系统(ADAS),如前撞预警(FCW),已得到广泛应用,在一些国家,商用车辆已强制使用该系统。然而,在实际应用中,FCW 系统会产生许多误报。利用从卡车自然驾驶研究数据中收集的场景和驾驶行为数据,提出了一种可变阈值评估方法,以确定与误报相关的因素。通过 k-means 聚类,根据驾驶特征将总共 450 个避免碰撞事件分为三组。根据驾驶行为特征和场景对责任敏感安全(RSS)模型的参数进行校准,以评估卡车 FCW 系统的报警准确性。基于 RSS 模型的卡车 FCW 系统结果评估发现,在 450 个事件中有 47 个误报,误报率为 11.19%。当跟车距离较近(7 米)或较远(20 米)时,误报率达到 30% 以上。近距离驾驶集群(DCs)的最小碰撞时间(TTC)(5.81 秒)低于远距离驾驶集群(DCs)的最小碰撞时间(7.68 秒和 9.46 秒)。低速行驶集群的制动力(减速度为-0.16 g和-0.55 g)低于高速行驶集群(减速度=-1.21 g)。FCW 系统不符合驾驶员在不同情况下的反应时间和制动特性,是造成误报的主要原因。这一点在低速短距离和高速长距离场景中体现得更为明显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of false alarm alarms in truck FCW based on calibration of RSS model under different driving scenarios
Advanced driver-assistance systems (ADASs), such as forward collision warning (FCW), are widely used and, in some countries, have been made mandatory for commercial vehicles. In practical applications, however, FCW systems produce many false alarms. Using scenario and driving behavior data collected from naturalistic driving study data of trucks, a variable threshold evaluation method was proposed to determine the factors correlating with false alarms. A total of 450 collision avoidance events were divided based on driving characteristics into three groups with k-means clustering. Responsibility-sensitive safety (RSS) model’s parameters were calibrated with the driving behavior characteristics and scenarios to evaluate the truck FCW system’s alarm accuracy. The evaluation of the results of truck FCW system based on RSS model found 47 false alarm alarms in the 450 events, a false alarm rate of 11.19%. When the following distance was close (<7 m) or far (>20 m), the false alarm rate reached more than 30%. The minimum time to collision (TTC) in the close distance driving clusters (DCs) (5.81 s) was lower than that in long distance DCs (7.68 s and 9.46 s). Braking force in the low-speed DCs (deceleration at −0.16 g and −0.55 g) was lower than in high-speeded DC (deceleration = −1.21 g). The FCW system does not conform to the driver's reaction time and braking characteristics in different scenarios, and is the main reason for false alarms. This is more obviously reflected in low-speed short distance and high-speed long-distance scenarios.
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
International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology
International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology Engineering-Civil and Structural Engineering
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
105
审稿时长
88 days
期刊最新文献
An exploration of the preferences and mode choice behavior between autonomous demand-responsive transit and traditional buses Connected vehicle enabled hierarchical anomaly behavior management system for city-level networks Operational measures to maintaining physical distancing at railway stations Investigating the dynamics of speed and acceleration at merging and diverging sections using UAV based trajectory data Evaluating the impacts of major transportation disruptions – San Francisco Bay Area case study
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1