Characteristics of Dangerous Scenarios between Vehicles Turning Right and Pedestrians under Left-Hand Traffic
Source abstract
Abstract
Pedestrian deaths account for the highest percentage of fatality caused by traffic accidents in Japan. Increasing pedestrian safety is a key objective for reducing such deaths. For pedestrian fatality caused by vehicles at low speed, turning the vehicle toward the right was the most common behavior under left-hand traffic. Autonomous emergency braking (AEB) systems for pedestrian safety have great potential to mitigate pedestrian injuries and fatalities in traffic accidents. However, pedestrian-AEB systems, especially for vehicles turning right, are still under development. This study identified the characteristics of dangerous traffic scenarios between vehicles turning right and pedestrians, focusing on two directions of pedestrian crossing: from the left to the right side (Left-Pedestrian) and from the right to the left side (Right-Pedestrian). The ego vehicle recorded near-miss incidents using a drive recorder. The results revealed that the Left-Pedestrian and Right-Pedestrian scenarios had different features for both the width of roads going to and through the intersection and the average of the travel speeds of the ego vehicles. They had similar characteristics in terms of the presence of other vehicle categories, but differences in the relationship of numbers and/or travel directions of other vehicles. The findings of this study will contribute to the development and evaluation of safety systems for preventing collisions between right-turning vehicles and pedestrians at intersections.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Traffic and Road Safety · Traffic Prediction and Management Techniques · Traffic control and management
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
National Traffic Safety and Environment Laboratory, 7-42-27 Jindaiji-Higashi-machi, Chofu 182-0012, Tokyo, Japan
Faculty of Systems Design, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 6-6 Asahigaoka, Hino 191-0065, Tokyo, Japan
Funding
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport, and Tourism (MLIT)
References (36)
Show source-provided references
1. Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis of Japan (ITARDA) (2022). Annual Traffic Accident Report in 2021, ITARDA. (In Japanese).
2. Bagheri, M., Siekkinen, M., and Nurminen, J.K. (2014, January 3–7). Cellular-based vehicle to pedestrian adaptive communication for collision avoidance. Proceedings of the IEEE international Conference on Connected Vehicles and Exposure, Vienna, Austria. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308835284_Cellular-based_vehicle_to_pedestrian_V2P_adaptive_communication_for_collision_avoidance:450-456.10.1109/ICCVE.2014.7297588 ↗
3. Anaya, J.J., Merdrignac, P., Shagdar, O., Nashashibi, F., and Naranjo, J.E. (2014, January 8–11). Vehicle to pedestrian communications for protection of vulnerable road users. Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, Dearborn, Dearborn, MI, USA.10.1109/IVS.2014.6856553 ↗
4. Sugimoto, C., Nakamura, Y., and Hashimoto, T. (2008, January 25–28). Development of pedestrian-to-vehicle communication system prototype for pedestrian safety using both wide-area and direct communication. Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (AINA), Gino-wan, Japan. Available online: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4482690/authors#authors.10.1109/AINA.2008.126 ↗
5. Car-2-X and pedestrian safety10.1109/MVT.2009.935536 ↗
6. Wu, X., Miucic, R., Yang, S., Al-Stouhi, S., Misener, J., Bai, S., and Chan, W. (2014, January 14–17). Cars talk to phones: A DSRC Based vehicle–pedestrian safety system. Proceedings of the 80th IEEE Veh Technol Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada.10.1109/VTCFall.2014.6965898 ↗
7. Themann, P., Kotte, J., Raudszus, D., and Eckstein, L. (2015, January 11–14). Impact of positioning uncertainty of vulnerable road users on risk minimization in collision avoidance systems. Proceedings of the 81st IEEE Intelligent Veh Symposium, Glasgow, UK.10.1109/IVS.2015.7225846 ↗
8. Vehicle-to-pedestrian communication modeling and collision avoiding method in connected vehicle environment10.3141/2621-03 ↗
9. Lee, I., and Luan, B. (2016). Design of Autonomous Emergency Braking System Based on Impedance Control for 3-Car Driving Scenario, Paper (2016-01-1453), Society of Automotive Engineers. World Congress & Exposition.10.4271/2016-01-1453 ↗
10. Estimate of potential benefit for Europe of fitting autonomous emergency braking (AEB) systems for pedestrian protection to passenger cars10.1080/15389588.2014.931579 ↗
11. Issues and challenges for pedestrian active safety systems based on real world accidents10.1016/j.aap.2015.05.014 ↗
12. Rosen, E. (2013, January 11–13). Autonomous emergency braking for vulnerable road users. Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden. Available online: http://www.ircobi.org/wordpress/downloads/irc13/pdf_files/71.pdf.
13. Effects of automatic emergency braking systems on pedestrian crash risk10.1016/j.aap.2022.106686 ↗
14. Estimated benefit of automated emergency braking systems for vehicle–pedestrian crashes in the United States10.1080/15389588.2019.1602729 ↗
15. Situational characteristics of fatal pedestrian accidents involving vehicles traveling at low speeds in Japan10.1080/15389588.2019.1587166 ↗
16. Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis of Japan (ITARDA) (2020). ITARDA Information No. 136, ITARDA. (In Japanese).
17. Ding, Z., Sun, C., Zhou, M., Liu, Z., and Wu, C. (2021). Intersection vehicle turning control for fully autonomous driving scenarios. Sensors, 21.10.3390/s21123995 ↗
18. Ben-Akiva, M., and Lermans, S.R. (1985). Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand, The MIT Press.
19. Questionnaire based study of drivers’ error and violation at four-legged signalized intersection10.1080/19427867.2021.1961992 ↗
20. A context-aware driver model for determining recommended speed in blind intersection situations10.1016/j.aap.2021.106447 ↗
21. Statistical models of near-accident event and pedestrian behavior at non-signalized intersections10.1080/02664763.2021.1962263 ↗
22. Analysis on characteristics of dangerous driving events via recorded data of drive-recorder10.1016/j.trpro.2020.08.164 ↗
23. Situations of car-to-pedestrian contact10.1080/15389588.2012.678511 ↗
24. Nagai, M. (2009, January 20). Current situation in registration and application of drive recorder database. Proceedings of the Forum in JSAE Spring Convention in 2009 “What the Drive Recorder can contribute for Traffic Safety”, Yokohama, Japan. (In Japanese).
25. (2021). Near-Miss Incident Database Usage Manual l, Drive Recorder Data Center of Smart Mobility Research Center in Tokyo University Agriculture and Technology. (In Japanese).
26. (2021). Distance Measurement Tool Manual, Drive Recorder Data Center of Smart Mobility Research Center in Tokyo University Agriculture and Technology. (In Japanese).
27. Safety evaluation of pedestrian behaviour and violations at signalized pedestrian crossings10.1016/j.ssci.2014.05.010 ↗
28. Institute for Traffic Accident Research and Data Analysis of Japan (ITARDA) (2022). Behavior Analysis of Ego Vehicles during Right Turning before Impact Events, ITARDA. (In Japanese).
29. Association of impact velocity with risks of serious injuries and fatalities to pedestrians in commercial truck–pedestrian accidents
30. The relationship between impact speed and the probability of pedestrian fatality during a vehicle-pedestrian crash: A systematic review and meta-analysis10.1016/j.aap.2019.05.033 ↗
31. Pedestrian movements on footways10.2208/jscej1969.1977.268_99 ↗
32. (2022, February 03). Test protocol-AEB/LSS VRS systems version 4.3; European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP). Available online: https://cdn.euroncap.com/media/75436/euro-ncap-aeb-lss-vru-test-protocol-v43.pdf.
33. Evaluation of automated emergency braking system’s avoidance of pedestrian crashes at intersections under occluded conditions within a virtual simulator10.1016/j.aap.2022.106797 ↗
34. Relationship of pedestrian crash types and passenger vehicle types10.1016/j.jsr.2022.07.006 ↗
35. Analyzing the invisibility angles formed by vehicle blind spots to increase driver’s field of view and traffic safety10.1080/10803548.2020.1807126 ↗
36. Santos, A.C., Gerez, A., Pádua, A., Genaro, P., Silva, R., and Ferreira, S. (2020). The influence of A-pillar obscuration/location on driver visibility. SAE Tech. Pap., 2019-36-0062.10.4271/2019-36-0062 ↗