News

What can be expected from a human in an automated vehicle, SAE level 2 and 3? This is what is going to be discussed on the upcoming International Conference on Driver Distraction and Inattention at SAFER, Lindholmen, Gothenburg, October 15-17.

Within vehicle automation, some key safety issues are human-related and often described with terms such as Driver engagement, Driver-in-the-loop, Monitoring, Supervision, Fall-back readiness, Receptiveness, and Availability. These terms are frequently used to describe operator responsibilities while using automation and are related to Distraction and Inattention. This year’s conference theme will focus on these issues when automation is used to assist driving.
 
Although automation is not new in vehicle control systems, its effect on the driver engagement is increasingly in focus. Many vehicle systems already have self-acting or self-regulating mechanisms, e.g. automatic transmission, power steering, stability control, autonomous emergency braking, adaptive cruise control, or lane keeping assistance). However, recent concern for driver engagement safety issues while using increasingly sophisticated automation, e.g. SAE Level 2 and 3 systems is reflected both by the maturity of on-market in-vehicle driver monitoring systems, and efforts within recommended practice, design guidance, regulation, and safety rating of driver engagement. Read more here: https://saemobilus.sae.org/content/j3016_201806)
 
Several new elements in the Euro NCAP rating program are being developed. Euro NCAP’s strategy on assisted and automated driving will be presented at a keynote address by Richard Schram from EuroNCAP, just days before the presentation of results of its first ever assessment of automated driving technology October 18th, 2018. Further, Occupant Status Monitoring, for which a first rating protocol is planned for release in 2019, defines impaired driving as a driver who is disconnected from the driving task or not in a physical state that is sufficient for safe driving. Anders Lie, the expert in the special session, will talk about this.
 
Further recent developments are hotly debated:

• Recommended practice from SAE J3016 states that in Level 2 driving automation, the “driver (at all times) supervises the driving automation system and intervenes as necessary to maintain safe operation of the vehicle” (SAE J3016, p21), and that in Level 3 driving automation, a “DDT fallback-ready user is considered to be receptive to a request to intervene and/or to an evident vehicle system failure, whether or not the ADS issues a request to intervene as a result of such a vehicle system failure.” (SAE J3016, p. 22). Here, receptivity is defined as “An aspect of consciousness characterized by a person’s ability to reliably and appropriately focus his/her attention in response to a stimulus.”.
   
• Within vehicle regulation development, for example UNECE R79 ACSF, there are ongoing proposals on how to characterize driver availability, with statements such as “The system shall check if the driver is available to take over the driving task by permanently evaluating driver's activity”.
   
• Design Guidance has recently been provided to encourage adequate driver supervision (see page 33).

 
These issues will be discussed at a panel debate on Driver engagement during assisted driving, October 16 at 13:15.
 
Trent Victor at the DDI2018 Organisation Committee and Co-chair of the conference says:

"We hope that this conference will provide the opportunity to develop your understanding of state-of-the-art on these issues and identify how research more appropriately be focused on key needs".