Abstract

The interaction between a cyclist and a driver at unsignalized intersection remains a risky situation which may result in a collision with severe consequences, especially for the cyclist. Crash data show that the number of cyclist fatalities at unsignalized intersections has been stable the last years, indicating that more efforts should be given to improve safety in this specific scenario. Safety systems can help drivers avoid collisions with cyclists. However, systems addressing this conflict scenario are difficult to design, not only because of the technical aspects (e.g., sensor, or control limitations) but because those systems need to predict how drivers will or would control their car to be effective. A handful of studies focused on describing driver behaviour in this traffic scenario, but no computational model that can predict driver control can be found in the literature. The present study presents a driver model based on a biofidelic human sensorimotor control modelling framework predicting driver control in this traffic scenario. Two visual cues were implemented: 1) optical longitudinal looming, and 2) projected post-encroachment time between the bike and the car. The model was optimized using test-track data in which participants were asked to drive through an intersection where a cyclist would cross their travel path. The performances of the model were evaluated by comparing the simulated driver control process with the observed controls for each trial using a leave-one-out crossvalidation process. The results showed that the model performed rather well by reproducing similar braking controls, and kinematics, compared to the observations. The extent to which the model could be used by safety systems’ threat-assessment algorithms was discussed. Future research to improve the model performances was suggested.

Highlights

  • As the interest in cycling continues to grow because of health and environmental benefits, so does the number of conflicts between motorists and cyclists

  • Safety systems—such as automated emergency braking (AEB) or forward collision warning (FCW)—designed for crossing-cyclist scenarios are being installed in cars

  • The European new car assessment program (Euro NCAP) assesses AEB system functionality when the car is on a collision course with a crossing cyclist [2]

Read more

Summary

Introduction

As the interest in cycling continues to grow because of health and environmental benefits, so does the number of conflicts between motorists and cyclists. The European crash statistics database shows that the proportion of cyclist fatalities compared to all road fatalities has been increasing year after year [1]. Developing countermeasures to change this trend is an important matter. Safety systems—such as automated emergency braking (AEB) or forward collision warning (FCW)—designed for crossing-cyclist scenarios are being installed in cars. The European new car assessment program (Euro NCAP) assesses AEB system functionality when the car is on a collision course with a crossing cyclist [2]. The performance of the threat-assessment algorithms implemented in safety systems

Objectives
Methods
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call