Longitudinal control behaviour: Analysis and modelling based on experimental surveys in Italy and the UK. (April 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Pariota, Luigi; Bifulco, Gennaro Nicola; Galante, Francesco; Montella, Alfonso; Brackstone, Mark
• Is Part Of: Accident analysis and prevention. Volume 89(2016)
• Page Start: 74
• Page End: 87
• Publication Date: 2016-04
• Subjects: Active road safety -- Driving automation -- Driving behaviour -- Car-following -- Instrumented vehicles -- Cross-country experiments; Accidents -- Prevention -- Periodicals; Accident Prevention -- Periodicals; Accidents -- Prévention -- Périodiques; 363.106
• DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.01.007
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0001-4575

Abstract

Highlights: Presented analyses refer to 146 drivers from two different countries (Italy and UK). A cluster analysis is adopted to identify equilibrium car-following conditions. Observed equilibrium spacing can be fitted using lognormal distributions. A significant number of potentially dangerous behaviours is observed in all the samples. Large datasets show a larger incidence of risk-adverse behaviours. Abstract: This paper analyses driving behaviour in car-following conditions, based on extensive individual vehicle data collected during experimental field surveys carried out in Italy and the UK. The aim is to contribute to identify simple evidence to be exploited in the ongoing process of driving assistance and automation which, in turn, would reduce rear-end crashes. In particular, identification of differences and similarities in observed car-following behaviours for different samples of drivers could justify common tuning, at a European or worldwide level, of a technological solution aimed at active safety, or, in the event of differences, could suggest the most critical aspects to be taken into account for localisation or customisation of driving assistance solutions. Without intending to be exhaustive, this paper moves one step in this direction. Indeed, driving behaviour and human errors are considered to be among the main crash contributory factors, and a promising approach for safety improvement is the progressive introduction of increasing levels of driving automation in next-generation vehicles, according to the active/preventive safety approach. However, the more advanced the system, the more complex will be the integration in the vehicle, and the interaction with the driver may sometimes become unproductive, or risky, should the driver be removed from the driving control loop. Thus, implementation of these systems will require the interaction of human driving logics with automation logics and then an enhanced ability in modelling drivers' behaviour. This will allow both higher active-safety levels and higher user acceptance to be achieved, thus ensuring that the driver is always in the control loop, even if his/her role is limited to supervising the automatic logic. Currently, the driving mode most targeted by driving assistance systems is longitudinal driving. This is required in various driving conditions, among which car-following assumes key importance because of the huge number of rear-end crashes. The increased availability of lower-cost information and communication technologies (ICTs) has enhanced the possibility of collecting copious and reliable car-following individual vehicle data. In this work, data collected from three different experiments, two carried out in Italy and one in the UK, are analysed and compared. The experiments involved 146 drivers (105 Italian drivers and 41 UK drivers). Data were collected by two instrumented vehicles. Our analysis focused on inter-vehicular spacing in equilibrium car-following conditions. We observed that (i) the adopted equilibrium spacing can be fitted using lognormal distributions, (ii) the adopted equilibrium spacing increases with speed, and (iii) the dispersion between drivers increases with speed. In addition, according to different headway thresholds (up to 1 second) a significant number of potentially dangerous behaviours is observed. Three different car-following paradigms are also applied to each of the experiments, and modelling parameters are calibrated and compared to obtain indirect confirmation about the observed similarities and differences in driving behaviour.