Longitudinal safety impacts of cooperative adaptive cruise control vehicle's degradation.

INTRODUCTION The adaptive cruise control (ACC) and cooperative ACC (CACC) systems are critical parts of self-driving vehicles. The ACC vehicles detect front vehicle' information via vehicle-mounted sensors and make longitudinal reactions automatically, while CACC vehicles enhance the performance by vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) wireless communication. However, CACC vehicles may abruptly degrade to ACC mode in reality due to various reasons, including communication failures, driver manipulations, and cyber-attacks. The sudden degradation will definitely bring negative influences on safety. METHOD This study quantitatively evaluated the longitudinal safety impacts of vehicles' degradation in a CACC fleet based on microscopic simulations. The realistic CACC and ACC models proposed by the California Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH) were used for simulation experiments. The time integrated time-to-collision (TIT) was measured to quantify the collision risks. Extensive simulations were conducted via a fleet of 10 CACC vehicles and speed profiles of vehicles in different scenarios were compared. Key factors, including the leading vehicle's deceleration rate, the number of vehicles between degraded vehicles (NVDVs), threshold of TTC, and visibility were also examined via sensitivity analyses. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Simulation results indicate that degradation has significant negative influences on longitudinal safety of degraded vehicles under the driving state of deceleration. Degradation at middle positions in a CACC fleet, such as fourth and fifth positions, is much safer than that at others. Moreover, nonadjacent degradation is much riskier than adjacent degradation at the front positions of a fleet. NVDVs can bring inverse impacts on safety with different degradation positions. Speed profiles imply that the hysteresis of degraded vehicles' speed control is the major reason for high collision risks. Practical applications: Appropriately, hierarchical countermeasures have the potential to reduce the longitudinal safety impacts of degradation. Findings of this study can contribute to determining the applicable length of CACC fleets.

[1]  Frank Kargl,et al.  Analyzing attacks on cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) , 2017, 2017 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC).

[2]  J. Karl Hedrick,et al.  PRACTICAL STRING STABILITY FOR LONGITUDINAL CONTROL OF AUTOMATED VEHICLES , 2004 .

[3]  Hao Wang,et al.  Optimal velocity model with dual boundary optimal velocity function , 2015 .

[4]  Wei Wang,et al.  Development of a variable speed limit strategy to reduce secondary collision risks during inclement weathers. , 2014, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[5]  Qiang Meng,et al.  Evaluation of rear-end crash risk at work zone using work zone traffic data. , 2011, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[6]  Byungkyu Park,et al.  Assessment of mobility, energy, and environment impacts of IntelliDrive-based Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control and Intelligent Traffic Signal control , 2010, Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology.

[7]  John C Hayward,et al.  NEAR-MISS DETERMINATION THROUGH USE OF A SCALE OF DANGER , 1972 .

[8]  Zhongke Shi,et al.  The effects of vehicular gap changes with memory on traffic flow in cooperative adaptive cruise control strategy , 2015 .

[9]  Wei Wang,et al.  Evaluating impacts of different longitudinal driver assistance systems on reducing multi-vehicle rear-end crashes during small-scale inclement weather. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[10]  Mostafa El-Said,et al.  DSRC Performance Analysis in Foggy Environment for Intelligent Vehicles System , 2017 .

[11]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  Enhanced intelligent driver model to access the impact of driving strategies on traffic capacity , 2009, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[12]  Lu Xing,et al.  Integrated Cooperative Adaptive Cruise and Variable Speed Limit Controls for Reducing Rear-End Collision Risks Near Freeway Bottlenecks Based on Micro-Simulations , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[13]  Amir Alipour-Fanid,et al.  String Stability Analysis of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control under Jamming Attacks , 2017, 2017 IEEE 18th International Symposium on High Assurance Systems Engineering (HASE).

[14]  Bart van Arem,et al.  The Impact of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control on Traffic-Flow Characteristics , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[15]  Takeki Ogitsu,et al.  Control Procedures and Exchanged Information for Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control of Heavy-Duty Vehicles Using Broadcast Inter-Vehicle Communication , 2014, International Journal of Intelligent Transportation Systems Research.

[16]  Wen-Long Jin,et al.  Mobility and Environment Improvement of Signalized Networks through Vehicle-to-Infrastructure (V2I) Communications , 2016 .

[17]  Mohamed Abdel-Aty,et al.  Longitudinal safety evaluation of connected vehicles' platooning on expressways. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[18]  Ye Li,et al.  Evaluating the safety impact of adaptive cruise control in traffic oscillations on freeways. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[19]  M M Minderhoud,et al.  Extended time-to-collision measures for road traffic safety assessment. , 2001, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[20]  Harald Waschl,et al.  Nonlinear MPC for Emission Efficient Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control , 2015 .

[21]  E. Petridou,et al.  Human factors in the causation of road traffic crashes , 2004, European Journal of Epidemiology.

[22]  Chengcheng Xu,et al.  Can we trust the speed–spacing relationship estimated by car-following model from non-stationary trajectory data? , 2019 .

[23]  Lina Kattan,et al.  Variable speed limit: A microscopic analysis in a connected vehicle environment , 2015 .

[24]  Steven E Shladover,et al.  Modeling cooperative and autonomous adaptive cruise control dynamic responses using experimental data , 2014 .

[25]  Nathan van de Wouw,et al.  Graceful Degradation of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[26]  Xuedong Yan,et al.  In-depth analysis of drivers' merging behavior and rear-end crash risks in work zone merging areas. , 2015, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[27]  Steven E Shladover,et al.  Impacts of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control on Freeway Traffic Flow , 2012 .

[28]  Juneyoung Park,et al.  Developing an algorithm to assess the rear-end collision risk under fog conditions using real-time data , 2018 .

[29]  Bart van Arem,et al.  Effects of Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control on traffic flow stability , 2010, 13th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[30]  Simone Baldi,et al.  An Adaptive Switched Control Approach to Heterogeneous Platooning With Intervehicle Communication Losses , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems.

[31]  Xiao-Yun Lu,et al.  COOPERATIVE ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL (CACC) DEFINITIONS AND OPERATING CONCEPTS , 2015 .

[32]  Wei Wang,et al.  Evaluation of the impacts of cooperative adaptive cruise control on reducing rear-end collision risks on freeways. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[33]  Nicholas F. Maxemchuk,et al.  Highway Capacity Benefits from Using Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communication and Sensors for Collision Avoidance , 2011, 2011 IEEE Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Fall).

[34]  Dipak Ghosal,et al.  Security vulnerabilities of connected vehicle streams and their impact on cooperative driving , 2015, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[35]  Vicente Milanés Montero,et al.  Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control in Real Traffic Situations , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[36]  Wei Wang,et al.  Predicting crash likelihood and severity on freeways with real-time loop detector data. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[37]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  Adaptive cruise control design for active congestion avoidance , 2008 .

[38]  Ruzena Bajcsy,et al.  Improved driver modeling for human-in-the-loop vehicular control , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[39]  Pierluigi Pisu,et al.  A Receding Horizon Switching Control Resilient to Communication Failures for Connected Vehicles , 2017 .

[40]  Christopher Nowakowski,et al.  Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control , 2015 .

[41]  Katja Vogel,et al.  A comparison of headway and time to collision as safety indicators. , 2003, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[42]  Qiang Meng,et al.  Estimation of rear-end vehicle crash frequencies in urban road tunnels. , 2012, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[43]  Cheol Oh,et al.  Estimation of rear-end crash potential using vehicle trajectory data. , 2010, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[44]  Riender Happee,et al.  Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents , 2015 .

[45]  Nathan van de Wouw,et al.  Graceful degradation of CACC performance subject to unreliable wireless communication , 2013, 16th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC 2013).

[46]  Wei Wang,et al.  Reducing the risk of rear-end collisions with infrastructure-to-vehicle (I2V) integration of variable speed limit control and adaptive cruise control system , 2016, Traffic injury prevention.