• search hit 6 of 14
Back to Result List

Impact of Partially Automated Driving Functions on Forensic Accident Reconstruction: A Simulator Study on Driver Reaction Behavior in the Event of a Malfunctioning System Behavior

  • Partially automated driving functions (SAE Level 2) can control a vehicle's longitudinal and lateral movements. However, taking over the driving task involves automation risks that the driver must manage. In severe accidents, the driver's ability to avoid a collision must be assessed, considering their expected reaction behavior. The primary goal of this study is to generate essential data on driver reaction behavior in case of malfunctions in partially automated driving functions for use in legal affairs. A simulator study with two scenarios involving 32 subjects was conducted for this purpose. The first scenario investigated driver reactions to system limitations during cornering. The second scenario examined driver responses to phantom braking caused by the AEBS. As a result, the first scenario shows that none of the subjects could control the situation safely. Due to partial automation, we could also identify a new part of the reaction time, the hands-on time, which leads to increased steering reaction times of 1.18 to 1.74Partially automated driving functions (SAE Level 2) can control a vehicle's longitudinal and lateral movements. However, taking over the driving task involves automation risks that the driver must manage. In severe accidents, the driver's ability to avoid a collision must be assessed, considering their expected reaction behavior. The primary goal of this study is to generate essential data on driver reaction behavior in case of malfunctions in partially automated driving functions for use in legal affairs. A simulator study with two scenarios involving 32 subjects was conducted for this purpose. The first scenario investigated driver reactions to system limitations during cornering. The second scenario examined driver responses to phantom braking caused by the AEBS. As a result, the first scenario shows that none of the subjects could control the situation safely. Due to partial automation, we could also identify a new part of the reaction time, the hands-on time, which leads to increased steering reaction times of 1.18 to 1.74 seconds. In the second scenario, we found that 25 of the 32 subjects could not override the phantom braking by pressing the accelerator pedal, although 16 subjects were informed about the system analog to the actual vehicle manuals. Overall, the study suggests that the current legal perspective on vehicle control and the expected driver reaction behavior for accident avoidance should be reconsidered.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Additional Services

Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Daniel PaulaORCiD, Maximilian BauderORCiD, Claus PfeilschifterORCiD, Franziska Petermeier, Tibor KubjatkoORCiD, Klaus Böhm, Andreas RienerORCiD, Hans-Georg SchweigerORCiD
Language:English
Document Type:Preprint
Year of first Publication:2023
Publisher:Preprints
Place of publication:Basel
Pages:25
Review:nein
Open Access:ja
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:573-42173
Related Identifier:https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202311.0947.v1
Faculties / Institutes / Organizations:Fakultät Informatik
Fakultät Elektro- und Informationstechnik
CARISSMA Institute of Automated Driving (C-IAD)
CARISSMA Institute of Electric, Connected and Secure Mobility (C-ECOS)
Human-Computer Interaction Group (HCIG)
Licence (German):License Logo Creative Commons BY 4.0
Note:
Die veröffentlichte Version dieses Preprints ist ebenfalls in diesem Repositorium verzeichnet, s. https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-haw/frontdoor/index/index/docId/4276
Release Date:2023/12/15