SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 1 Integrated Project Co-operative Systems for Road Safety “Smart Vehicles on Smart Roads” Debra Topham, David Ward MIRA Ltd (UK) {debra.topham, T1.2.1 Leader SAFESPOTSAFESPOT

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 2 Objectives for this meeting Agree a common approach to Use Cases –taking into consideration needs of other SPs (SP2, SP3, …) …

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 3 Presentation Plan T1.2.1 aim Use case background Approaches to representing use cases Pros and cons of representation Proposed use case Use case titles Classification by area Collection of further use cases Planning of next steps

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 4 Approaches to Use Case definition 1.“We have a sensor, what could we use the data for”? 2.“What driving scenarios exist, within which we could collect data to support co- operative functions?” Chosen (Suggested? Recommended??) approach in T1.2.1 Define use cases as event-driven driving scenarios –These have safety related implications To be able to extract essential information from the spatial and temporal situation of the scenario from which the “System under Design” is able to provide warning messages to the Driver, Other Vehicles or the Infrastructure

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 5 T1.2.1 View Point of Use Cases To define event driven use case driving scenarios that have safety related implications in order to extract essential information from the spatial/temporal situation of the scenario from which the “SuD” is able to provide warning messages to the Driver, Other Vehicles or the Infrastructure in order to minimise road traffic incidents.

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 6 Use Case Terminology Use case definition: A use case captures the systems response under various conditions as it responds to a request from a primary actor Stake holders: Actor definition: Boundary Diagram:

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 7 Boundary Diagram Safeprobe platform

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 8 Use Case Representation Template Textual step wise description of the interaction an actor has with the system UML Graphical representation of the interaction an actor has with the system using standard semantics

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 9 Pro’s and Cons of use case representation Template – Easy to read – No knowledge of tool required – Contains d etailed data about use case data –Data easily accessible –No tools required to implement use case UML – Knowledge of programming tool and semantics required – Each partner requires software –Does not show detail –Interaction diagrams –Can get difficult to follow

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 10 Choice of Use Case Representation Choice: Textual step wise approach –Why Template contains more detail and flexibility No knowledge of semantics required No tool required UML representation can be included in the deliverable for “selected” scenarios However, definitions must be consistent and accurate

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 11 Proposed Use Case Template Case Name Case ID <Follow use case ID number convention SP1_UC#ID_partnerID#_v1.#> Status Goal Level Driving environment Vehicle probe type Successful end condition Failed end condition Trigger Frequency of occurrence Primary Actor Secondary Actor(s)

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 12 Scenario Description StepAction Extensions StepAction : 2a : Super ordinates Subordinates Open issues

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 13 Actor List Probe vehicle Other vehicle (s) Bridge/tunnel infrastructure Ambient environment infrastructure Roadside infrastructure Pedestrian VRU Cyclist VRU PTW rider VRU Vehicle sensors Positioning source Other roadside sensors Roadside actuators Local roadside unit Central control unit

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 14 Triggering Event Actors triggering probe vehicle scenario: Roadside infrastructure I2V Probe vehicles (V2V) Vehicle sensors

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 15 Driving Scenario Attributes Road types Motorway/highway Urban Suburban Rural Weather Conditions Fog Rain Wind Snow Road segment Tunnel Bridge Curved road Straight road Intersection/junction Roundabout Pedestrian crossing –Signalled –Unsignalled Diurnal cycle Night Day

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 16 Use Case Names (1) Vulnerable road user warning Pedestrian in the road Motorcycle overtaking Pedestrian on the Zebra crossing Pedestrian using pelican crossing Hazard warning Obstacle detected in the road Vehicle travelling in the wrong direction Emergency breaking Driver braking erratically Vehicle being driven erratically Emergency vehicle approaching Accident warning Stolen vehicle warning Lane departure support Weather conditions Environmental Effects Vehicle has run a red light Road works Lane restrictions Dangerous goods being transported Train approaching road crossing

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 17 Use case Names (2) Driving support Vehicle exceeding advisory speed limit Traffic lights about to change Lane departure support Road works Heavy goods vehicle Uneven road surface Cooperative driving Lane merge Lane change Traffic beyond range of ADAS sensors slowing down

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 18 Plan of work Work with SP2 to define “overlap” use cases Allocate T1.2.1 partners to define specific use cases Compile use cases Create draft deliverable for SP1 comment Finalise deliverable Deliverable goes for review

SAFESPOT Project SP1 Meeting 3 rd – 4 th April, Berlin 19 Discussion Use case groupings Triggering actors Permutations of use cases given the different attributes for each scenario Ideas for further use cases