Browse Topic: Automated driving systems
This SAE Recommended Practice defines requirements for equipment and supplies to be used in measuring shot peening intensity and other surface enhancement processes. It is intended as a guide toward standard practice and is subject to change to keep pace with experience and technical advances. Guidelines for use of these items can be found in SAE J443 and SAE J2597.
Treat foundational AV safety like seatbelts - make it non-proprietary and universal. An open safety stack, shared scenarios, benchmarks, and core validation tools can speed certification, reduce duplicated V&V and build public trust while preserving vendor differentiation. The bottleneck isn't compute - it's verification. Autonomous features are shipping in more vehicles and markets, but the gating factor is no longer raw compute. It's whether developers and regulators can verify systems against requirements and validate them against real-world operating design domains (ODDs) with confidence and repeatability. Today, many safety-critical components, from scenario libraries to pass/fail criteria, live in proprietary silos. That fragmentation slows regression testing, complicates regulator audits across regions, and duplicates effort across the industry. The result is an expensive, bespoke path to certification for every program and geography.
The rapid introduction of new Automated Driving Systems (ADS) in the last years has led to an urge for robust methodologies for the type approval of vehicles equipped with such technologies. As a result, different Regulations addressing this field have been adopted. These Regulations are mainly based in the New Assessment and Testing Methodology (NATM) developed within the World Forum for the Harmonisation of Vehicle Regulations (WP29). However, the complexity of the regulatory ecosystem extends beyond type approval. This complexity requires a thorough analysis in order to avoid any possible gap which may jeopardise the feasibility of Automated Driving Vehicles deployment. This paper analyses the possible mismatches among the different regulations currently in place or under development and proposes a holistic approach, where the concept of the Operational Design Domain (ODD) takes a relevant role.
This study presents a structured evaluation framework for reasonably foreseeable misuse in automated driving systems (ADS), grounded in the ISO 21448 Safety of the Intended Functionality (SOTIF) lifecycle. Although SOTIF emphasizes risks that arise from system limitations and user behavior, the standard lacks concrete guidance for validating misuse scenarios in practice. To address this gap, we propose an end-to-end methodology that integrates four components: (1) hazard modeling via system–theoretic process analysis (STPA), (2) probabilistic risk quantification through numerical simulation, (3) verification using high-fidelity simulation, and (4) empirical validation via driver-in-the-loop system (DILS) experiments. Each component is aligned with specific SOTIF clauses to ensure lifecycle compliance. We apply this framework to a case of driver overreliance on automated emergency braking (AEB) at high speeds—a condition where system intervention is intentionally suppressed. Initial
TOC
One of the biggest splashes at IAA Mobility 2025 in Munich was the debut of the technology-packed iX3, the first of the BMW Neue Klasse line. Inside its shapely contours lie four Superbrains, including the Heart of Joy. These units represent the hometown OEM's big bet on zonal architecture - and on Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. as a co-development partner. That's because Qualcomm co-developed the Snapdragon Ride AD software stack in the Heart of Joy, which uses Qualcomm's Snapdragon Ride Pilot automated driving system, with BMW. The version of Ride Pilot that made its global debut in the iX3 uses a newly developed Snapdragon Ride AD software stack that runs on the Snapdragon Ride Platform.
This SAE Recommended Practice provides guidelines for the use, performance, installation, activation, and switching of marking lamps on Automated Driving System (ADS) equipped vehicles.
This article suggests a validation methodology for autonomous driving. The goal is to validate front camera sensors in advanced driver-assist systems (ADAS) based on virtually generated scenarios. The outcome is the CARLA-based hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation environment (CHASE). It allows the rapid prototyping and validation of the ADAS software. We tested this general approach on a specific experimental application/setup for a vehicle front camera sensor. The setup results were then proven to be comparable to real-world sensor performance. The CARLA simulation environment was used in tandem with a vehicle CAN bus interface. This introduced a significantly improved realism to user-defined test scenarios and their results. The approach benefits from almost unlimited variability of traffic scenarios and the cost-efficient generation of massive testing data.
It is expected that Level 4 and 5 automated driving systems-dedicated vehicles (ADS-DVs) will eventually enable persons to travel at will who are otherwise unable to obtain a driver’s license for a conventional vehicle, namely, persons with certain visual, cognitive, and/or physical impairments. This information report focuses on these disabilities but also provides guidance for those with other disabilities. This report is limited to fleet-operated, on-demand, shared mobility scenarios, as this is widely considered to be the first way people will be able to interact with ADS-DVs. To be more specific, this report does not address fixed-route transit services or private vehicle ownership. Similarly, this report is focused on motor vehicles (refer to SAE J3016), not scooters, golf carts, etc. Lastly, this report does not address the design of chair lifts, ramps, or securements for persons who use wheeled mobility devices (WHMD) (e.g., wheelchair, electric cart, etc.), as these matters
Items per page:
50
1 – 50 of 411