A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement
The Society of Automotive Engineers defines five levels of driving automation (LoDA) (plus a “no-automation” level 0). Among them, the third level, called “conditional driving automation,” here denoted LoDA 3, performs the complete dynamic driving task (DDT) within a limited operational domain. Alth...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer London
2018
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/116231 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9922-3711 |
| _version_ | 1826207620647616512 |
|---|---|
| author | Sheridan, Thomas B |
| author2 | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics |
| author_facet | Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Sheridan, Thomas B |
| author_sort | Sheridan, Thomas B |
| collection | MIT |
| description | The Society of Automotive Engineers defines five levels of driving automation (LoDA) (plus a “no-automation” level 0). Among them, the third level, called “conditional driving automation,” here denoted LoDA 3, performs the complete dynamic driving task (DDT) within a limited operational domain. Although the driver is free from any driving task while the automation is engaged, she is expected to be receptive to an automation-issued request to intervene (RTI) and is also expected to perform DDT fallback in a timely manner. This paper gives a method to derive an optimal design for RTI and proves that LoDA 3 coupled with the optimal RTI should never be simply called “conditional driving automation.” This means that the definition of LoDA 3 is not complete and that at least one important level is missing in the list for LoDAs. This paper provides two ways to resolve the problem. Keywords: Automated driving; Levels of driving automation; Request to intervene; Levels of automation; Trading of authority; Shared control |
| first_indexed | 2024-09-23T13:52:24Z |
| format | Article |
| id | mit-1721.1/116231 |
| institution | Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-09-23T13:52:24Z |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publisher | Springer London |
| record_format | dspace |
| spelling | mit-1721.1/1162312022-09-28T16:46:52Z A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement Sheridan, Thomas B Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Mechanical Engineering Sheridan, Thomas B The Society of Automotive Engineers defines five levels of driving automation (LoDA) (plus a “no-automation” level 0). Among them, the third level, called “conditional driving automation,” here denoted LoDA 3, performs the complete dynamic driving task (DDT) within a limited operational domain. Although the driver is free from any driving task while the automation is engaged, she is expected to be receptive to an automation-issued request to intervene (RTI) and is also expected to perform DDT fallback in a timely manner. This paper gives a method to derive an optimal design for RTI and proves that LoDA 3 coupled with the optimal RTI should never be simply called “conditional driving automation.” This means that the definition of LoDA 3 is not complete and that at least one important level is missing in the list for LoDAs. This paper provides two ways to resolve the problem. Keywords: Automated driving; Levels of driving automation; Request to intervene; Levels of automation; Trading of authority; Shared control 2018-06-11T19:59:05Z 2018-06-11T19:59:05Z 2018-02 2017-08 2018-02-27T05:14:43Z Article http://purl.org/eprint/type/JournalArticle 1435-5558 1435-5566 http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/116231 Inagaki, Toshiyuki and Thomas B. Sheridan. “A Critique of the SAE Conditional Driving Automation Definition, and Analyses of Options for Improvement.” Cognition, Technology & Work (February 2018): 1-10 © 2018 The Author(s) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9922-3711 en http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10111-018-0471-5 Cognition, Technology & Work Creative Commons Attribution http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ The Author(s) application/pdf Springer London Springer London |
| spellingShingle | Sheridan, Thomas B A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement |
| title | A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement |
| title_full | A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement |
| title_fullStr | A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement |
| title_full_unstemmed | A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement |
| title_short | A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement |
| title_sort | critique of the sae conditional driving automation definition and analyses of options for improvement |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/116231 https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9922-3711 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sheridanthomasb acritiqueofthesaeconditionaldrivingautomationdefinitionandanalysesofoptionsforimprovement AT sheridanthomasb critiqueofthesaeconditionaldrivingautomationdefinitionandanalysesofoptionsforimprovement |