journal article·2025-11-28Open access

An Integrated Automated Driving Risk Indicator in Urban Mixed Traffic Environments

Sangjae Lee, Minkyung Kim, Juneyoung Park, Cheol Oh

Applied Sciences· Volume 15· Issue 23

Abstract

In this study, a novel methodology is proposed to evaluate automated driving safety in mixed traffic environments, including autonomous vehicles (AVs) and manually driven vehicles (MVs). An open-source AV dataset obtained from a real-world autonomous mobility testbed in Korea was used for methodology development and evaluations. The driving behavior was evaluated using well-known promising indicators, including the standard deviation of the vehicle speed, acceleration noise, standard deviation of the lane offset, time to collision (TTC), and deceleration to avoid a crash (DRAC). Min-max and max-min normalization was performed to unify the units of the evaluation indicators. The importance of each driving safety indicator was derived through the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) performed by traffic experts, and the weights were estimated based on the average of the collected importance. The normalized indicators were integrated to obtain the automated driving risk score (ADRS), which is regarded as a measure of automated driving safety. The automated driving safety degraded considerably in road sections where right turns were made at intersections and that had a bus stop. Hazardous driving events of AVs were visualized, which is useful for monitoring mixed traffic safety and developing effective countermeasures for proactive road safety management.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Autonomous Vehicle Technology and Safety · Traffic and Road Safety · Human-Automation Interaction and Safety

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Transportation and Logistics Engineering, Hanyang University Erica Campus, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea

Department of Smart City Engineering, Hanyang University Erica Campus, Ansan 15588, Republic of Korea

Funding

Korea Agency for Infrastructure Technology Advancement

References (29)

Show source-provided references
1. Guériau, M., and Dusparic, I. (2020, January 20–23). Quantifying the impact of connected and autonomous vehicles on traffic efficiency and safety in mixed traffic. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), Rhodes, Greece.10.1109/ITSC45102.2020.9294174 ↗
2. Stability and safety evaluation of mixed traffic flow with connected automated vehicles on expressways10.1016/j.jsr.2020.09.012 ↗
3. Randazzo, R. (2024, June 17). A Slashed Tire, a Pointed Gun, Bullies on the Road: Why Do Waymo Self-Driving Vans Get So Much Hate?. Available online: https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2018/12/11/waymo-self-driving-vehicles-face-harassment-road-rage-phoenix-area/2198220002/.
4. Integration of automated vehicles in mixed traffic: Evaluating changes in performance of following human-driven vehicles10.1016/j.aap.2021.106006 ↗
5. Ruan, K., and Di, X. (March,, January 22). Learning human driving behaviors with sequential causal imitation learning. Proceedings of the 36th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Virtual.10.1609/aaai.v36i4.20382 ↗
6. Extracting Useful Information from Basic Safety Message Data: An Empirical Study of Driving Volatility Measures and Crash Frequency at Intersections10.1177/0361198118773869 ↗
7. Impact of traffic oscillations on freeway crash occurrences10.1016/j.aap.2009.10.009 ↗
8. Identifying crash propensity using specific traffic speed conditions10.1016/j.jsr.2004.11.002 ↗
9. Analysis of crash precursors on instrumented freeways
10. Evaluating the effectiveness of active vehicle safety systems10.1016/j.aap.2017.01.015 ↗
11. Variability in traffic flow quality experienced by drivers: Evidence from instrumented vehicles10.1177/0361198106198800101 ↗
12. The Measurement of Acceleration Noise—A Traffic Parameter10.1287/opre.10.6.745 ↗
13. Liu, S., Wang, J., and Fu, T. (2016). Effects of Lane Width, Lane Position and Edge Shoulder Width on Driving Behavior in Underground Urban Expressways: A Driving Simulator Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 13.10.3390/ijerph13101010 ↗
14. Evaluation of lateral driving safety for elderly drivers in high-speed curve driving conditions10.7470/jkst.2021.39.3.280 ↗
15. Hayward, J.C. (1972, January 17–21). Near miss determination through use of a scale of danger. Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Highway Research Board, Washington, CO, USA.
16. Hydén, C. (1987). The Development of a Method for Traffic Safety Evaluation: The Swedish Traffic Conflicts Technique.
17. Extended time-to-collision measures for road traffic safety assessment10.1016/S0001-4575(00)00019-1 ↗
18. Surrogate safety measures from traffic simulation models
19. Calibration and validation of simulated vehicle safety performance at signalized intersections10.1016/j.aap.2008.01.003 ↗
20. Speed, speed variation and crash relationships for urban arterials10.1016/j.aap.2018.01.032 ↗
21. Equivalency Factor Based on Acceleration Noise for Mixed Traffic Condition10.1007/s40890-019-0073-9 ↗
22. Road Traffic Noise Prediction Model under Interrupted Traffic Flow Condition10.1007/s10666-008-9138-6 ↗
23. Driving Characteristics of Drivers Avoiding Lateral Obstacles in Mountain Highway Tunnels: A Dynamic Lateral Safety Distance Prediction Model
24. Svensson, Å. (1998). A Method for Analysing the Traffic Process in a Safety Perspective. [Ph.D. Thesis, University of Lund].
25. Simulation of Traffic Conflicts at Unsignalized Intersections with Tsc-Sim10.1016/0001-4575(94)90021-3 ↗
26. Surrogate Safety Evaluation at Uncontrolled Intersection in Non-Lane Base Traffic Conditions
27. Hancock, M.W., and Wright, B. (2013). A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
28. Kuang, Y., Qu, X., Weng, J., and Etemad-Shahidi, A. (2015). How does the driver’s perception reaction time affect the performances of crash surrogate measures?. PLoS ONE, 10.10.1371/journal.pone.0138617 ↗
29. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP)