MIT Libraries logoDSpace@MIT

MIT
View Item 
  • DSpace@MIT Home
  • MIT Open Access Articles
  • MIT Open Access Articles
  • View Item
  • DSpace@MIT Home
  • MIT Open Access Articles
  • MIT Open Access Articles
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement

Author(s)
Sheridan, Thomas B
Thumbnail
Download10111_2018_Article_471.pdf (943.4Kb)
PUBLISHER_CC

Publisher with Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution

Terms of use
Creative Commons Attribution http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
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
Date issued
2018-02
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/116231
Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics; Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Mechanical Engineering
Journal
Cognition, Technology & Work
Publisher
Springer London
Citation
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)
Version: Final published version
ISSN
1435-5558
1435-5566

Collections
  • MIT Open Access Articles

Browse

All of DSpaceCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

My Account

Login

Statistics

OA StatisticsStatistics by CountryStatistics by Department
MIT Libraries
PrivacyPermissionsAccessibilityContact us
MIT
Content created by the MIT Libraries, CC BY-NC unless otherwise noted. Notify us about copyright concerns.