Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Continuous Risk Measures for Driving Support

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2303.08007 v1 pith:7BWSLNF2 submitted 2023-03-14 cs.RO cs.AI

classification cs.ROcs.AI
keywords riskcasesgaussianmeasuremeasuresnon-crashsurvivalttce
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

In this paper, we compare three different model-based risk measures by evaluating their stengths and weaknesses qualitatively and testing them quantitatively on a set of real longitudinal and intersection scenarios. We start with the traditional heuristic Time-To-Collision (TTC), which we extend towards 2D operation and non-crash cases to retrieve the Time-To-Closest-Encounter (TTCE). The second risk measure models position uncertainty with a Gaussian distribution and uses spatial occupancy probabilities for collision risks. We then derive a novel risk measure based on the statistics of sparse critical events and so-called survival conditions. The resulting survival analysis shows to have an earlier detection time of crashes and less false positive detections in near-crash and non-crash cases supported by its solid theoretical grounding. It can be seen as a generalization of TTCE and the Gaussian method which is suitable for the validation of ADAS and AD.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools