2017Unpublished venueRequires access

Why functional safety experts worry about automotive systems having increasing autonomy

Helen Monkhouse, Ibrahim Habli, John McDermid, Siddartha Khastgir, Gunwant Dhadyalla

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

There is a growing interest by the public, policy makers and technologists in vehicles having highly automated systems, and ultimately autonomy. However, there is an apparent gap between where the automotive industry wants to go, and where its approach to safety assurance has come from, e.g. where the human driver is often treated as a primary risk control of hazardous events. In this paper, we explore this gap and report on the outcomes of a workshop, involving automotive functional safety engineers, that examined, empirically, some of the safety concerns that these safety engineers have around assuring the safety of highly-automated driving. Given the high degree of interactive complexity emerging from highly automated systems, the workshop data highlighted the need for a new safety concept and a new risk model and changes to the current legal and standards landscape.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

There is a growing interest by the public, policy makers and technologists in vehicles having highly automated systems, and ultimately autonomy. However, there is an apparent gap between where the automotive industry wants to go, and where its approach to safety assurance has come from, e.g. where the human driver is often treated as a primary risk control of hazardous events. In this paper, we explore this gap and report on the outcomes of a workshop, involving automotive functional safety engineers, that examined, empirically, some of the safety concerns that these safety engineers have around assuring the safety of highly-automated driving. Given the high degree of interactive complexity emerging from highly automated systems, the workshop data highlighted the need for a new safety concept and a new risk model and changes to the current legal and standards landscape.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

There is a growing interest by the public, policy makers and technologists in vehicles having highly automated systems, and ultimately autonomy. However, there is an apparent gap between where the automotive industry wants to go, and where its approach to safety assurance has come from, e.g. where the human driver is often treated as a primary risk control of hazardous events. In this paper, we explore this gap and report on the outcomes of a workshop, involving automotive functional safety engineers, that examined, empirically, some of the safety concerns that these safety engineers have around assuring the safety of highly-automated driving. Given the high degree of interactive complexity emerging from highly automated systems, the workshop data highlighted the need for a new safety concept and a new risk model and changes to the current legal and standards landscape.

Key concepts: Safety assurance, Automotive industry, Autonomy, Worry, Functional safety, Risk analysis (engineering), System safety, Hazardous waste

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Why functional safety experts worry about automotive systems having increasing autonomy — Research Paper | ScholarLens