IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p7938-d595318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Crash Injury Model Involving Autonomous Vehicle: Investigating of Crash and Disengagement Reports

Author

Listed:
  • Amolika Sinha

    (Research Centre for Integrated Transport Innovation (rCITI), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia)

  • Vincent Vu

    (Research Centre for Integrated Transport Innovation (rCITI), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia)

  • Sai Chand

    (Research Centre for Integrated Transport Innovation (rCITI), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia)

  • Kasun Wijayaratna

    (School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney (UTS), Sydney, NSW 2007, Australia)

  • Vinayak Dixit

    (Research Centre for Integrated Transport Innovation (rCITI), School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
    IAG of Risk in Smart Cities, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia)

Abstract

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) are being extensively tested on public roads in several states in the USA, such as California, Florida, Nevada, and Texas. AV utilization is expected to increase into the future, given rapid advancement and development in sensing and navigation technologies. This will eventually lead to a decline in human driving. AVs are generally believed to mitigate crash frequency, although the repercussion of AVs on crash severity is ambiguous. For the data-driven and transparent deployment of AVs in California, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (CA DMV) commissioned AV manufacturers to draft and publish reports on disengagements and crashes. This study performed a comprehensive assessment of CA DMV data from 2014 to 2019 from a safety standpoint, and some trends were discerned. The results show that decrement in automated disengagements does not necessarily imply an improvement in AV technology. Contributing factors to the crash severity of an AV are not clearly defined. To further understand crash severity in AVs, the features and issues with data are identified and discussed using different machine learning techniques. The CA DMV accident report data were utilized to develop a variety of crash AV severity models focusing on the injury for all crash typologies. Performance metrics were discussed, and the bagging classifier model exhibited the best performance among different candidate models. Additionally, the study identified potential issues with the CA DMV data reporting protocol, which is imperative to share with the research community. Recommendations are provided to enhance the existing reports and append new domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Amolika Sinha & Vincent Vu & Sai Chand & Kasun Wijayaratna & Vinayak Dixit, 2021. "A Crash Injury Model Involving Autonomous Vehicle: Investigating of Crash and Disengagement Reports," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7938-:d:595318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7938/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/7938/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vinayak V Dixit & Sai Chand & Divya J Nair, 2016. "Autonomous Vehicles: Disengagements, Accidents and Reaction Times," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-14, December.
    2. Takaya Saito & Marc Rehmsmeier, 2015. "The Precision-Recall Plot Is More Informative than the ROC Plot When Evaluating Binary Classifiers on Imbalanced Datasets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, March.
    3. Araz Taeihagh & Hazel Si Min Lim, 2019. "Governing autonomous vehicles: emerging responses for safety, liability, privacy, cybersecurity, and industry risks," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 103-128, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mohamed Alawadhi & Jumah Almazrouie & Mohammed Kamil & Khalil Abdelrazek Khalil, 2020. "A systematic literature review of the factors influencing the adoption of autonomous driving," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 11(6), pages 1065-1082, December.
    2. Christopher J Greenwood & George J Youssef & Primrose Letcher & Jacqui A Macdonald & Lauryn J Hagg & Ann Sanson & Jenn Mcintosh & Delyse M Hutchinson & John W Toumbourou & Matthew Fuller-Tyszkiewicz &, 2020. "A comparison of penalised regression methods for informing the selection of predictive markers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-14, November.
    3. Le, Hong Hanh & Viviani, Jean-Laurent, 2018. "Predicting bank failure: An improvement by implementing a machine-learning approach to classical financial ratios," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 16-25.
    4. João Chang Junior & Fábio Binuesa & Luiz Fernando Caneo & Aida Luiza Ribeiro Turquetto & Elisandra Cristina Trevisan Calvo Arita & Aline Cristina Barbosa & Alfredo Manoel da Silva Fernandes & Evelinda, 2020. "Improving preoperative risk-of-death prediction in surgery congenital heart defects using artificial intelligence model: A pilot study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Arthur De Sá Ferreira & Ney Meziat-Filho & Ana Paula Antunes Ferreira, 2021. "Double threshold receiver operating characteristic plot for three-modal continuous predictors," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 2231-2245, September.
    6. Masabho P Milali & Samson S Kiware & Nicodem J Govella & Fredros Okumu & Naveen Bansal & Serdar Bozdag & Jacques D Charlwood & Marta F Maia & Sheila B Ogoma & Floyd E Dowell & George F Corliss & Maggy, 2020. "An autoencoder and artificial neural network-based method to estimate parity status of wild mosquitoes from near-infrared spectra," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, June.
    7. Charles David A. Icasiano & Araz Taeihagh, 2021. "Governance of the Risks of Ridesharing in Southeast Asia: An In-Depth Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-32, June.
    8. Inga Ulnicane & William Knight & Tonii Leach & Bernd Carsten Stahl & Winter-Gladys Wanjiku, 2021. "Framing governance for a contested emerging technology:insights from AI policy [The next space race is Artificial Intelligence]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(2), pages 158-177.
    9. Kajal Lahiri & Cheng Yang, 2023. "ROC and PRC Approaches to Evaluate Recession Forecasts," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 19(2), pages 119-148, September.
    10. Tzu-Hsuan Lin & Jehn-Ruey Jiang, 2021. "Credit Card Fraud Detection with Autoencoder and Probabilistic Random Forest," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(21), pages 1-16, October.
    11. Alfred Krzywicki & David Muchlinski & Benjamin E. Goldsmith & Arcot Sowmya, 2022. "From academia to policy makers: a methodology for real-time forecasting of infrequent events," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1489-1510, November.
    12. Liu, Peng & Zhang, Yawen & He, Zhen, 2019. "The effect of population age on the acceptable safety of self-driving vehicles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 341-347.
    13. Roberto Battistini & Luca Mantecchini & Maria Nadia Postorino, 2020. "Users’ Acceptance of Connected and Automated Shuttles for Tourism Purposes: A Survey Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-17, December.
    14. Marco Due~nas & V'ictor Ortiz & Massimo Riccaboni & Francesco Serti, 2021. "Assessing the Impact of COVID-19 on Trade: a Machine Learning Counterfactual Analysis," Papers 2104.04570, arXiv.org.
    15. Pel, Bonno & Raven, Rob & van Est, Rinie, 2020. "Transitions governance with a sense of direction: synchronization challenges in the case of the dutch ‘Driverless Car’ transition," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    16. Cian Ryan & Finbarr Murphy & Martin Mullins, 2019. "Semiautonomous Vehicle Risk Analysis: A Telematics‐Based Anomaly Detection Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 1125-1140, May.
    17. Hazel Si Min Lim & Araz Taeihagh, 2019. "Algorithmic Decision-Making in AVs: Understanding Ethical and Technical Concerns for Smart Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-28, October.
    18. Wei-Hsuan Lo-Ciganic & Julie M Donohue & Eric G Hulsey & Susan Barnes & Yuan Li & Courtney C Kuza & Qingnan Yang & Jeanine Buchanich & James L Huang & Christina Mair & Debbie L Wilson & Walid F Gellad, 2021. "Integrating human services and criminal justice data with claims data to predict risk of opioid overdose among Medicaid beneficiaries: A machine-learning approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-18, March.
    19. Nica-Avram, Georgiana & Harvey, John & Smith, Gavin & Smith, Andrew & Goulding, James, 2021. "Identifying food insecurity in food sharing networks via machine learning," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 469-484.
    20. Ali J. Ghandour & Huda Hammoud & Samar Al-Hajj, 2020. "Analyzing Factors Associated with Fatal Road Crashes: A Machine Learning Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(11), pages 1-13, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:7938-:d:595318. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.