A holistic decision-making framework for integrated safety

A Bayesian decision-theoretic decision-making framework for integrated vehicle safety systems is introduced. The framework tries to address the increasing need for introduction of optimal decision-making to integrated vehicle safety. The framework tries to capture all the interdependencies between systems in one optimisation problem by designing appropriate risk functions. This is achieved by incorporating driver behaviour model and pre-crash occupant position tracking. New software methods and tools should also be developed to efficiently accommodate this. The framework, in general, leads to higher design flexibility and scalability 1.

[1]  Z Lu,et al.  OUT-OF-POSITION AIRBAG LOAD SENSITIVITY STUDY. IN: AIR BAGS AND BELT RESTRAINTS , 2004 .

[2]  Kristian Kroschel,et al.  A Multilevel Collision Mitigation Approach—Its Situation Assessment, Decision Making, and Performance Tradeoffs , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[3]  R W Huey,et al.  Inappropriate , 2020, Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

[4]  Fredrik Gustafsson,et al.  A framework and automotive application of collision avoidance decision making , 2008, Autom..

[5]  Susumu Ejima,et al.  A study on occupant kinematics behaviour and muscle activities during pre-impact braking based on volunteer tests , 2007 .

[6]  Herbert Hanselmann,et al.  Challenges in automotive software engineering , 2008, ICSE Companion '08.

[7]  Angelos Amditis,et al.  A Holistic Approach to the Integration of Safety Applications: The INSAFES Subproject Within the European Framework Programme 6 Integrating Project PReVENT , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[8]  Markus H. Muser,et al.  Trauma Biomechanics: Accidental injury in traffic and sports , 2007 .

[9]  Marc Green,et al.  "How Long Does It Take to Stop?" Methodological Analysis of Driver Perception-Brake Times , 2000 .

[10]  Alan W. Brown.  Model driven architecture: Principles and practice , 2004, Software and Systems Modeling.

[11]  E. Coelingh,et al.  A situation and threat assessment algorithm for a rear-end collision avoidance system , 2008, 2008 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium.

[12]  Christoph Grimm.  Languages for system specification: Selected contributions on UML, systemC, system Verilog, mixed-signal systems, and property specification from FDL'03 , 2004 .

[13]  Manfred Broy,et al.  Engineering Automotive Software , 2007, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[14]  Colin Atkinson,et al.  Model-Driven Development: A Metamodeling Foundation , 2003, IEEE Softw..

[15]  Jeffrey Richard Crandall,et al.  Influence of pre-impact occupant properties on the injury response during frontal collisions , 2008 .

[16]  J. Berger.  Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis , 1988 .

[17]  Lars Petersson,et al.  Threat assessment for general road scenes using monte carlo sampling , 2006, 2006 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference.

[18]  Guy S. Nusholtz,et al.  The Effect of Impact Environment on Occupant Risk and the Belted/Unbelted Dilemma , 2007 .

[19]  John Richardson,et al.  Alarm timing, trust and driver expectation for forward collision warning systems. , 2006, Applied ergonomics.

[20]  Jochen Ludewig,et al.  Models in software engineering – an introduction , 2003, Software and Systems Modeling.

[21]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Designing human-centered automation: trade-offs in collision avoidance system design , 2000, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst..

[22]  M.M. Trivedi,et al.  Human Behavior Based Predictive Brake Assistance , 2006, 2006 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium.

[23]  Nicolas Navet,et al.  Trends in Automotive Communication Systems , 2005, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[24]  John D. Lee,et al.  Alerts for In-Vehicle Information Systems: Annoyance, Urgency, and Appropriateness , 2007, Hum. Factors.