Safety of automated driving is a major concern of different stakeholders. Therefore, the manufacture of an automated driving system needs to demonstrate the safety of the systems. This should be done in the safety validation, which will require different tests in different test environments. Therefore, the safety validation activities must be part of the test concept.
Additional input for this question is provided by the PEGASUS project (Mazzega, J. et al., 2019), other similar projects (V&V Method, SAKURA, HEADSTAR, CCAM Sunrise) or in terms of future regulation the NATM discussion on UN ECE level (UNECE -NATM, 2021).
References that motivate the concept of a postive risk balance for automated driving, i.e. the AD needs to drive safer than the human driver, are Di Fabio et al. (2017) or Bonnefon, et al. (2020).
Main Question
Does the test concept consider the safety validation?
Sub-Questions
- Is a test concept defined which validates that the ADF fulfils its intended purpose?
- Is a test concept defined that validates a positive risk balance?
- Are multiple test pillars (public road, test track, virtual testing, etc.) considered in the test concept?
References
- Mazzega, J. et al. (2019) PEGASUS METHOD. Zenodo. doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.6595201.
- UNECE -NATM (2021) or (UNECE -NATM, 2021)
- Di Fabio, U., Broy, M., Brüngger, R.J., Eichhorn, U. and Grunwald, A. (2017). Ethics commission automated and connected driving. Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure of the Federal Republic of Germany, 1.
- Bonnefon, J.-F, Cerny, D., Danaher, J. et al. (2020) Ethics of connected and automated vehicles report