Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving Context
Forward collision warning (FCW) systems typically employ forward sensing technologies to identify possible forward collisions and provide an alert to the driver in the event they have not recognized a threat. These systems have demonstrated safety benefits. However, because the base rate of collisio...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Safety |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2313-576X/8/1/5 |
| _version_ | 1797442506224304128 |
|---|---|
| author | Sean Seaman Pnina Gershon Linda Angell Bruce Mehler Bryan Reimer |
| author_facet | Sean Seaman Pnina Gershon Linda Angell Bruce Mehler Bryan Reimer |
| author_sort | Sean Seaman |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Forward collision warning (FCW) systems typically employ forward sensing technologies to identify possible forward collisions and provide an alert to the driver in the event they have not recognized a threat. These systems have demonstrated safety benefits. However, because the base rate of collisions is low, sensitive FCW systems can provide a high rate of alarms in situations with no or low probability of collision, which may negatively impact driver responsiveness and satisfaction. We examined over 2000 naturally occurring FCWs in two modern vehicles as a part of a naturalistic driving study investigation into advanced vehicle technologies. Analysts used cabin and forward camera footage, as well as environmental characteristics, to judge the likelihood of a crash during each alert, which were used to model the likelihood of an alert representing a possible collision. Only nine FCWs were considered “crash possible and imminent”. Road-type, speed, traffic density, and deceleration profiles distinguished between alert severity. Modeling outcomes provide clues for reducing nuisance and false alerts, and the method of using subjective video annotation combined with vehicle kinematics shows promise for investigating FCW alerts in the real world. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T12:43:48Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-6ba9f5294e3f41c99db0a932912cd1bd |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2313-576X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T12:43:48Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Safety |
| spelling | doaj.art-6ba9f5294e3f41c99db0a932912cd1bd2023-11-30T22:15:17ZengMDPI AGSafety2313-576X2022-01-0181510.3390/safety8010005Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving ContextSean Seaman0Pnina Gershon1Linda Angell2Bruce Mehler3Bryan Reimer4Touchstone Evaluations Inc., Detroit, MI 48202, USAMassachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation & Logistics AgeLab, Cambridge, MA 02142, USATouchstone Evaluations Inc., Detroit, MI 48202, USAMassachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation & Logistics AgeLab, Cambridge, MA 02142, USAMassachusetts Institute of Technology Center for Transportation & Logistics AgeLab, Cambridge, MA 02142, USAForward collision warning (FCW) systems typically employ forward sensing technologies to identify possible forward collisions and provide an alert to the driver in the event they have not recognized a threat. These systems have demonstrated safety benefits. However, because the base rate of collisions is low, sensitive FCW systems can provide a high rate of alarms in situations with no or low probability of collision, which may negatively impact driver responsiveness and satisfaction. We examined over 2000 naturally occurring FCWs in two modern vehicles as a part of a naturalistic driving study investigation into advanced vehicle technologies. Analysts used cabin and forward camera footage, as well as environmental characteristics, to judge the likelihood of a crash during each alert, which were used to model the likelihood of an alert representing a possible collision. Only nine FCWs were considered “crash possible and imminent”. Road-type, speed, traffic density, and deceleration profiles distinguished between alert severity. Modeling outcomes provide clues for reducing nuisance and false alerts, and the method of using subjective video annotation combined with vehicle kinematics shows promise for investigating FCW alerts in the real world.https://www.mdpi.com/2313-576X/8/1/5forward collision warningsnaturalistic driving studycrash avoidance |
| spellingShingle | Sean Seaman Pnina Gershon Linda Angell Bruce Mehler Bryan Reimer Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving Context Safety forward collision warnings naturalistic driving study crash avoidance |
| title | Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving Context |
| title_full | Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving Context |
| title_fullStr | Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving Context |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving Context |
| title_short | Evaluating the Associations between Forward Collision Warning Severity and Driving Context |
| title_sort | evaluating the associations between forward collision warning severity and driving context |
| topic | forward collision warnings naturalistic driving study crash avoidance |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2313-576X/8/1/5 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT seanseaman evaluatingtheassociationsbetweenforwardcollisionwarningseverityanddrivingcontext AT pninagershon evaluatingtheassociationsbetweenforwardcollisionwarningseverityanddrivingcontext AT lindaangell evaluatingtheassociationsbetweenforwardcollisionwarningseverityanddrivingcontext AT brucemehler evaluatingtheassociationsbetweenforwardcollisionwarningseverityanddrivingcontext AT bryanreimer evaluatingtheassociationsbetweenforwardcollisionwarningseverityanddrivingcontext |