Group 1a: Traffic scenarios

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Evaluating health informatics projects Reasons for and problems of evaluation Objective model Subjective model.
Advertisements

A2 Unit 4A Geography fieldwork investigation Candidates taking Unit 4A have, in section A, the opportunity to extend an area of the subject content into.
KS 2 Being responsible for driving safety What responsibility do other road users have towards me? What responsibilities do I have towards other road.
1 Challenge the future The Dutch Automated Vehicle Initiative: Challenges for automated driving Dr. R.(Raymond) G. Hoogendoorn Assistant Professor Delft.
Title slide PIPELINE QRA SEMINAR. PIPELINE RISK ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION TO GENERAL RISK MANAGEMENT 2.
Purpose of the Standards
Module 1-1 Road Safety 101. Module Tracking Your Progress Through Highway Safety Core Competencies Core Competency 1: Core Competency 2: Core Competency.
Baker College Curriculum Design Tier II. Curriculum Tier Professional Development Tier I – (required) Professional development for curriculum development.
Indicator Baseline Target Milestones PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS.
Legal issues addressed in the EU funded AdaptIVe project
ITS America – April 2004 The Naturalistic Driving Study: Why are Crashes Occurring? Suzie Lee Research Scientist, Center for Crash Causation and Human.
Road safety data: an essential tool for developing effective road safety policy Fred Wegman, Chairman of IRTAD 24 February 2009.
General Safety Regulation ACEA discussion paper Renzo Cicilloni Director Safety Paris, June 2009 AEBS/LDWS
Business Analysis and Essential Competencies
Connected Learning with Web 2.0 For Educators Presenter: Faith Bishop Principal Consultant Illinois State Board of Education
Development of Indicators for Integrated System Validation Leena Norros & Maaria Nuutinen & Paula Savioja VTT Industrial Systems: Work, Organisation and.
Kick off Meeting. Discussion Points Definitions Education Communication Training Project Goals Project Scope Training Scope Learning Objectives Roles.
1 TRB Workshop on Road Vehicle Automation Steven E. Shladover, Sc.D. California PATH Program University of California, Berkeley Jane Lappin Volpe National.
National Road Safety Committee Cambodia’s response to the Decade of Action Mr. CHAN Dara Deputy Director General of Transport, Deputy General.
Cars - the better drivers ?
Quality Assessment July 31, 2006 Informing Practice.
1 Research methods and models of driver behavior studies.
1 ACSF Test Procedure Draft proposal – For discussion OICA and CLEPA proposal for the IG Group ACSF Tokyo, 2015, June Informal Document ACSF
RLV Reliability Analysis Guidelines Terry Hardy AST-300/Systems Engineering and Training Division October 26, 2004.
1 He Says vs. She Says Model Validation and Calibration Kevin Chang HNTB Corporation
1 Road Safety Education Cambodia Safe School Zone September, 2010 By: Taing Koungveng.
The SIPDE and Smith System “Defensive Driving Techniques”
Directions for this Template  Use the Slide Master to make universal changes to the presentation, including inserting your organization’s logo –“View”
HIGH SPEED RAIL ASSESSMENT NORGE
1 6th ACSF meeting Tokyo, April 2016 Requirements for “Sensor view” & Environment monitoring version 1.0 Transmitted by the Experts of OICA and CLEPA.
MITROVACKA GIMNAZIJA, II 5 TRAFFIC SAFETY. INTRODUCTION This handbook is intended for teenagers, as well as for their parents and teachers. It contains.
Transmitted by the Experts of TRL (EC)
OICA „Certification of automated Vehicles“
Overview of Intervention Mapping
HN BUSINESS HND GRADED UNIT 3
Scope of the audit Reference Frameworks Tashkent, October 2017.
Informal Document: ACSF Rev.1
DID YOU KNOW ROAD SIGNS ARE OPTIMALLY LOCATED TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF DRIVERS. Road signs tell drivers how fast to drive, when and where to stop, when.
Father Muller Medical College & Hospital, Mangalore, Karnataka.
WATCH OUT DANGER ON THE ROAD!!
Submitted by the experts of OICA
Making Decisions D-E-C-I-D-E
High level objectives Overview Proposal for approach
Status report ‘Sub group 2’: Real world road test
Chapter 6: Effects of Driver Conditions
Transmitted by the expert from ISO
Future Certification of Automated Driving Systems
Submitted by the experts of OICA
Transmitted by Co-Chairs of VMAD
Social Dynamics’ Approach to Creating Solutions
HDV CO2 certification CoP provisions
Safety Distance to the front
Safety Assessment of Automated Vehicles
New Assessment & Test Methods
Report on Automated Vehicle activities
Making Decisions D-E-C-I-D-E
Draft report VMAD to GRVA
Progress Report GRE TF AVSR
Safety concept for automated driving systems
Submitted by the experts of OICA
Informal Document: ACSF-10-08
Transmitted by the Co-Chairs
Safety considerations on Emergency Manoeuver
In service monitoring Near miss logging Continuous improvement
Progress Report GRE TF AVSR
INTRODUCING THE STANDARDS TOOLKIT
Test track -/real world testing
VMAD Describe in a few sentences what should be the outcome of the ‘audit/virtual testing/in-use data reporting Audit Confirmation that the manufacturers.
Directions for this Template
Norwegian regulation on testing of self-driving vehicles on roads
Presentation transcript:

Group 1a: Traffic scenarios VMAD-03-10 Group 1a: Traffic scenarios

Scope of the traffic scenario group Let’s not limit this

Definition Traffic scenario: Traffic scenario's (in this context) are digitilized traffic situations that can be manipulated by parameters and are used for simulations (to be discussed) We need to include the validation on the track and road in this definition We need to align the definition with SOTIF

A. The outcome of "traffic scenarios" Relevant driving situation(can be different for systems) to validate by different means (to be defined) the performance of AV’s Within the ODD Containing boundaries of the ODD Demonstrating the way the vehicle acts (also when reaching the boundaries) …not complete Pass/fail criteria What do we want to avoid? 5g, 20g and others Scenario Database Definition Free availability Standard

The scenario’s should cover We realize that scenario’s do not proof the safe behavior of the AV under all conditions. We need a common understanding on this. The scenario’s should cover Sensor perception Decision making (also complex situations) Vehicle dynamic response

B. Define the underlying questions to be answered by "traffic scenarios" How do scenario’s contribute to the approval of AV’s? How does scenario testing contribute to safety in traffic? What is the residual risk of fatal crashes in case the AV is involved? (needs to be worked out) Related to inpreventable in the Japanese presentation Not intended as pass/fail, but for measuring Does the scenario’s only cover operational safety or also functional safety?(scope) For what kind of validation matter is the scenario used? (Simulation, track…) To be completed

C. Indicate which persons/organizations need to be involved in this group October

D. Collect all available proposals/information and translate this into a draft for the next VMAD Accidentology information These situations could be covered in the scenario’s (if relevant to AV’s) Expert opinions on Empirical knowledge on accidents Parameters of the difficult situation Pegasus MOSAR Needs to be completed GRVA 86 document

Additional AV’s can create new traffic scenario’s of critical situations in the database. This critical situations can be evaluated by a national safety board to improve the safety (either vehicle, infra or other)

From the whiteboard