New IEEE Standard – Active. This standard applies to road vehicles. It defines a minimum set of reasonable assumptions and foreseeable scenarios that shall be considered in the development of safety related models that are part of an automated driving system (ADS).<\/p>\n
| PDF Pages<\/th>\n | PDF Title<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1<\/td>\n | Front Cover <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 2<\/td>\n | Title page <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 4<\/td>\n | Important notices and disclaimers concerning IEEE Standards documents <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 7<\/td>\n | Participants <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 12<\/td>\n | Contents <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 14<\/td>\n | 1. Overview 1.1 Scope 1.2 Purpose 1.3 Word usage <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 15<\/td>\n | 2. Normative references 3. Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations 3.1 Definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 18<\/td>\n | 3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations 4. Minimum set of assumptions about reasonably foreseeable behaviors of other road users to be used in scenarios 4.1 Assumptions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 23<\/td>\n | 4.2 Application of assumptions to scenarios 4.2.1 Rationale for example scenario selection <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 24<\/td>\n | 4.2.2 Coordinate system <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 27<\/td>\n | 4.2.3 Scenario definitions <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 28<\/td>\n | 4.2.3.1 V1-S1: Ego vehicle driving next to other road users <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 30<\/td>\n | 4.2.3.2 V1-S2: Ego vehicle driving longitudinally behind another road user <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 31<\/td>\n | 4.2.3.3 V1-S3: Ego vehicle driving in between leading and trailing road users <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 32<\/td>\n | 4.2.3.4 V1-S4: Ego vehicle\u2019s path intersecting with VRU crossing the road <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 34<\/td>\n | V1-S5: Ego vehicle\u2019s path intersecting with other road user\u2019s path moving in opposite direction <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 35<\/td>\n | V1-S6: Ego vehicle negotiating an intersection with nonoccluded road users <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 37<\/td>\n | 4.2.3.7 V1-S7: Ego vehicle negotiating an intersection with occluded road users <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 39<\/td>\n | 5. Common attributes from contributed safety-related models 5.1 Safety-related model attributes(verifiable or demonstratable via inspection 5.1.1 Incorporates the laws of physics <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 40<\/td>\n | 5.1.2 Accommodates acceptable risk 5.1.3 Supports reasonably foreseeable scenarios 5.1.4 Focuses on motion control 5.1.5 Incorporates assumptions 5.1.6 Based on current position, heading and velocity of other safety-relevant objects <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 41<\/td>\n | 5.1.7 Supports prioritization of safety objectives 5.1.8 Is sensitive to adjustment in parameter values 5.1.9 Supports diverse safety-relevant objects 5.1.10 Supports emergency maneuvers <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 42<\/td>\n | 5.1.11 Defines a hazardous situation 5.1.12 Defines proper responses 5.1.13 Differentiates between initiator and responder For example, in a proper response definition, a safety-related model differentiates what actions the initiator and the responder should take, respectively, that would be an instantiation of this attribute. 5.1.14 Supports directional flexibility 5.1.15 Supports occlusion scenarios <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 43<\/td>\n | 5.1.16 Defines a safety envelope 5.1.17 Considers reasonably foreseeable events regarding right of way 5.1.18 Supports a theoretical outcome of no collisions upon universal adoption 5.1.19 Supports formal verification <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 44<\/td>\n | 5.1.20 Supports creation of performance indicators 5.1.21 Can be expressed in formal notation 5.1.22 Is transparent 5.1.23 Considers weather-related environmental conditions and road surface conditions 5.2 Safety-related model attributes demonstratable via validation 5.2.1 Validated through empirical evidence and industry best practices 5.2.2 Enables the ADS-operated vehicle to navigate safely <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 45<\/td>\n | 5.2.3 Exhibits a reasonable level of caution 5.2.4 Considers human violations of traffic rules Safety-related models can take into consideration that sometimes human road users may intentionally or unintentionally violate traffic rules in specific scenarios. While there does not exist a universal and complete list of possible human violations of traffic rules, the safety-related model can consider those that are reasonably foreseeable in the ODD. 5.2.5 Supports regional differences in behavior 5.2.6 Incorporates empirical, evidence-based methods <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 46<\/td>\n | 6. Validation and Verification (V&V) methods for assumptions used in safety-related models <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 47<\/td>\n | 6.1 Systematic process 6.2 Safety-By-Design architectures 6.3 Formal methods <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 48<\/td>\n | 6.4 Robustness analysis 6.5 Simulation testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 49<\/td>\n | 6.6 Closed course testing 6.7 Public road testing <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 50<\/td>\n | Annex A (informative)Application area: Use of IEEE Std 2846 normative assumptions within scenario-based virtual testing A.1 General A.2 Scenario-based testing (via simulation) A.2.1 Toward the definition of a kinematic search space <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 51<\/td>\n | A.3 Role of assumptions for test-case generation <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 54<\/td>\n | A.4 Exploring the kinematic search space <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 56<\/td>\n | Annex B (informative) Bibliography <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n | ||||||
| 59<\/td>\n | Back Cover <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" IEEE Standard for Assumptions in Safety-Related Models for Automated Driving Systems<\/b><\/p>\n |