Safety analysis of integrated adaptive cruise control and lane keeping control using discrete-time models of port-Hamiltonian systems

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siyuan Dai ◽  
Xenofon Koutsoukos
Keyword(s):  
Hamiltonian Systems ◽  
Discrete Time ◽  
Adaptive Cruise Control ◽  
Safety Analysis ◽  
Cruise Control ◽  
Lane Keeping ◽  
Discrete Time Models

scholarly journals Correctness Guarantees for the Composition of Lane Keeping and Adaptive Cruise Control

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 1216-1229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiangru Xu ◽  
Jessy W. Grizzle ◽  
Paulo Tabuada ◽  
Aaron D. Ames
Keyword(s):  
Adaptive Cruise Control ◽  
Cruise Control ◽  
Lane Keeping

scholarly journals Safety analysis of a vehicle equipped with Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (9) ◽  
pp. 367-372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeroen A.J. Ligthart ◽  
Jeroen Ploeg ◽  
Elham Semsar-Kazerooni ◽  
Mauro Fusco ◽  
Henk Nijmeijer
Keyword(s):  
Adaptive Cruise Control ◽  
Safety Analysis ◽  
Cruise Control ◽  
Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control

Driver Acceptance of Adaptive Cruise Control and Active Lane Keeping in Five Production Vehicles

2017 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 1949-1953
Author(s):  
Ian J. Reagan ◽  
David G. Kidd ◽  
Jessica B. Cicchino
Keyword(s):  
Adaptive Cruise Control ◽  
Highway Safety ◽  
Cruise Control ◽  
Driving Experience ◽  
Stop And Go ◽  
Driver Acceptance ◽  
Automation Technology ◽  
Lane Keeping ◽  
Toyota Prius

Little is known about how consumers interact with driving automation technology that controls steering, speed, or headway in production vehicles. Forty-eight Insurance Institute for Highway Safety employees used a Honda Civic, Infiniti QX60, Toyota Prius, or Audi A4 or Q7 as a personal vehicle for up to several weeks and completed surveys about their experiences. Agreement about whether adaptive cruise control (ACC) or active lane keeping (ALK) improved driving experience varied significantly among vehicles. The Q7’s ACC improved the driving experience significantly more than its ALK. The Civic’s ALK improved the driving experience more than the Q7’s system, but this effect only approached significance. Drivers were most comfortable using systems on free-flowing interstates and least comfortable using ACC in stop-and-go traffic and ALK on curvy roads. The findings show a range of qualitative differences in driving automation technologies and that use of current technologies likely is limited to low-demand conditions.

scholarly journals User-centred design evaluation of symbols for adaptive cruise control (ACC) and lane-keeping assistance (LKA)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mickaël Jean Rémy Perrier ◽  
Tyron Linton Louw ◽  
Oliver Carsten
Keyword(s):  
Online Survey ◽  
Adaptive Cruise Control ◽  
Cruise Control ◽  
Lane Departure ◽  
Driving Assistance ◽  
Driving Task ◽  
Assistance Systems ◽  
Lane Keeping ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
Selection Of

AbstractAdvanced driving assistance systems (ADAS) are now numerous, each relieving drivers of their responsibility for the control of different aspects of the driving task. Notably, adaptive cruise control (ACC) for longitudinal control, or lane departure prevention (LDP) and lane centring control (LCC) for lateral control, two variations of the lane-keeping assistance (LKA) system. Drivers must familiarise themselves with various symbols to correctly identify and activate the system they wish to be using and the existing standard graphical symbols for ACC and LKA are often replaced by manufacturers in favour of their own symbols. With a user-centred approach in mind, we previously conducted a focus group where drivers were invited to design their own symbols and discuss those symbols currently in-use. In the present research, we administered an online survey and analysed the responses from 328 drivers regarding different levels of knowledge about ADAS, to evaluate the usability of a selection of these symbols. Our results indicate that the standard ACC symbol would not be the most suitable of the four symbols tested, whereas, the standard LKA/LDP symbol was greatly confused with any of the four LCC symbols we tested, especially if hands were present on the symbol. Finally, drivers without prior knowledge of ADAS had more difficulties interpreting those symbols in general. Considerations for the development and evaluation of graphical symbols are discussed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document