Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
White Paper
October 2015
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Table of Contents
Background ................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Use of Acronyms in This Paper ...........................................................................................................................2
Working Group Members ...................................................................................................................................... 3
Working Group Charge........................................................................................................................................... 4
Initial Issues ................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Priority Issues, Definitions, and Descriptive Statements ......................................................................... 6
Priority Issues – Drafting Approach ................................................................................................................. 8
Safety: AV and CV...................................................................................................................................................... 9
Interoperability: CV .............................................................................................................................................. 13
Dedicated Infrastructure: AV and CV ............................................................................................................ 15
Security/Reliability/Redundancy: AV and CV ........................................................................................... 18
Stakeholders and Knowledge Transfer: Autonomous and Connected Vehicles .......................... 21
i
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Background
The Technology and Infrastructure Working Group (Working Group) is comprised of
representatives from business, academia, transportation-related organizations, and the
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). Elizabeth Birriel and Fred Heery from the
FDOT Traffic Engineering and Operations Office chaired the Working Group. Ben
Walker with HNTB was the Secretary for the Working Group and Chris Pedersen of the
Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium (FDRC) Consensus Center at Florida State
University (FSU) served as the facilitator for the Working Group.
The Technology and Infrastructure Working Group met 13 times during 2014-2015. Six
of the meetings were face-to face and seven were conference call/webinar meetings. The
Working Group identified key topics, explored challenges and opportunities, and
provided advice to FDOT on addressing challenges and leveraging opportunities. The
findings and advice are captured in this white paper.
The Working Group focused on issues related to development of autonomous vehicle
(AV) and connected vehicle (CV) technologies and their impacts on transportation
mobility and safety. Automated vehicles have the potential to help FDOT achieve safer
roads and less congestion, while CV technology has the potential to significantly enhance
roadway safety and mobility capabilities. The Working Group examined AV and CV
opportunities that could be leveraged to achieve transportation benefits and assist FDOT
in pursuing its vision statement.
The Working Group engaged in an iterative process to complete their work by:
•
•
•
•
Developing a greater understanding of AV and CV technologies and
infrastructure through educational presentations and group discussions;
Identifying and discussing issues;
Identifying opportunities and challenges;
Developing recommendations to deal with those challenges.
To help avoid confusion, the terms automated vehicle, AV, and CV will be used as
follows. Automated vehicle is an umbrella term that includes both AV and CV
technologies. AV is any vehicle equipped with advanced sensors (radar, laser imaging
detection and ranging [LiDAR], cameras, etc.) and computing abilities to perceive its
surroundings and activate steering, braking, and acceleration without operator input. CVs
employ vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-infrastructure communications to provide realtime warnings to a human driver to help them avoid crashes. Additional information can
include traffic signal status and traffic congestion and construction warnings as well as
impending severe weather events. Both technologies can improve the safety and
efficiency of Florida’s transportation system since over 90 percent of traffic crashes are
due to human error. CV technologies can also allow back office systems, such as the
traffic signal control system, to react to real-time information from a vehicle.
1
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Use of Acronyms in This Paper
AV ............................................................................................................................................ Autonomous Vehicle
CV .................................................................................................................................................Connected Vehicle
DHSMV .......................................................................... Department Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
DSRC .............................................................................................. Dedicated Short-Range Communications
DUI ........................................................................................................................... Driving Under the Influence
FCRC ................................................................................................. Florida Conflict Resolution Consortium
FDOT .................................................................................................. Florida Department of Transportation
FSU .................................................................................................................................... Florida State University
LiDAR ................................................................................................... Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging
NHTSA ............................................................................ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
OEM ............................................................................................................. Original Equipment Manufacturer
SoS............................................................................................................................................... System of Systems
USDOT ................................................................................... United States Department of Transportation
2
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Working Group Members
Members of the Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
And Others Who Contributed:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Elizabeth Birriel (FDOT) Past Chair
Fred Heery (FDOT) Chair
Ben Walker (HNTB) Secretary
Chris Pedersen (FCRC Consensus Center at FSU) Facilitator
Leticia Adams (Florida Chamber)
Daniel Beaty (Florida Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers)
Denise Bunnewith (North Florida Transportation Planning Organization)
April Blackburn (FDOT)
Jason Castillo (KHA)
David Chang (Atkins)
David Christian (Florida Chamber)
Mark Eacker (FDOT)
Bob Frey (Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority)
Rafael Hernandez (Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority)
Lora Hollingsworth (FDOT)
Jesus Martinez (Intelligent Transportation Society of Florida)
Rick Morrow (FDOT)
Suzanne Murtha (Atkins)
Will Otero (Auto Alliance)
Brian Pessaro (University of South Florida)
Raj Ponnaluri (FDOT)
Harry Reed (Capital Region Transportation Planning Agency)
Charles Reinholtz (Embry Riddle)
Lyle Seigler (FDOT)
David Sherman (HNTB)
Rod Sullivan (FCSL)
Valecia Summers (Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles)
Trey Tillander (FDOT)
Mark Wilson (FDOT)
3
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Working Group Charge
In General: The Working Group will gather information and develop a consensus work
product. The Working Group will identify key topics, explore challenges and
opportunities for key topics, and provide consensus advice on addressing challenges and
leveraging opportunities. The findings and advice will be captured in a white paper for
the FDOT Systems Planning Office. Beyond the white paper, the Working Group may
advise FDOT on the implementation of the Working Group recommendations.
Focus: The Working Group will cover issues related to the development of AV and CV
technologies and their impacts on transportation infrastructure. They will review and
recommend considerations for pilot projects to reflect their advice on findings and
recommendations.
AVs have recently evolved into a technology that could offer significant advancements in
achieving safer roads and reducing congestion. Any opportunity should be leveraged to
achieve the greatest benefit possible to assist FDOT in upholding its vision statement.
Challenges should be given due diligence to mitigate and/or limit any potential
disadvantage.
CV technology has the potential to significantly enhance transportation safety and
mobility. FDOT should coordinate with the United States Department of Transportation
(USDOT), academia, private companies, local governments, and operating agencies to
implement appropriate technology and infrastructure to allow seamless communications
of information to achieve the full impact of safety and efficiency gains that CV
technology may be able to offer. Coordination should include information sharing on
issues, especially for "last mile" issues where significant performance improvements (i.e.
safety, congestion) may be realized.
Infrastructure requirements should be identified and evaluated in order for AV and CV
technology to be successfully implemented. As part of FDOT’s primary goal, infrastructure
development may be critical for the wide-scale adoption of CV technology.
The Working Group may provide recommendations for future pilot projects; however, the
Working Group will not deploy or oversee a pilot project.
4
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Initial Issues
At the organizational meeting of the Working Group, an initial list of issues was
identified, discussed, and refined. Six priority issues emerged from a technology and
infrastructure perspective. The Working Group focused on these six priority issues for the
remainder of their work. Two of these issues, Defining Stakeholders and Knowledge
Transfer, were combined for analysis and recommendations. The issues of
security/reliability/redundancy and interoperability could be monitored by the
Department for national best practices and for future consideration.
The initial group of issues included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Safety (priority)
Security/reliability/ redundancy (priority)
Interoperability (priority)
Defining stakeholders (priority)
Dedicated infrastructure (priority)
Knowledge transfer (priority)
Funding
Capacity
Emissions
Fuel consumption
Travel time reliability
Privacy (perceived)
System availability
Scalability
5
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Priority Issues, Definitions, and Descriptive Statements
The Working Group focused work on the six priority issues:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Safety
Security/reliability/ redundancy
Interoperability
Defining stakeholders
Dedicated infrastructure
Knowledge transfer
The Working Group created the following definitions from a technology and
infrastructure perspective.
Safety – Safety is commonly defined as the condition of being protected from or unlikely
to cause danger, risk, or injury. Safety, when considering the technology and
infrastructure associated with automated vehicles, is any aspect of technology and
infrastructure that offers additional protection from danger, risk, or injury.
Descriptive Statement: Automated vehicles add a non-human element of safety by
programming the vehicle to respond to potentially unsafe conditions often caused by
human error. Vehicles with automated capabilities also allow for smoother control of the
vehicle prior to a potential crash. The application of safety devices within automated
vehicles varies with each level of automation, but, in general, is intended to reduce the
number of fatalities or injuries through conditions under human control. Function specific
automation (Level 1) improves safety outcomes, but does not eliminate driver error.
Combined function automation (Level 2) further improves safety outcomes by
automating more than one function at a time, but can still account for some human error.
Limited self-driving automation (Level 3) allows the driver to give full control to the
vehicle in certain situations. Full self-driving (Level 4) allows the driver to give full
control to the vehicle in all situations eliminating the potential for human error. Improved
safety outcomes include those associated with human error such as impairment,
distraction, drowsiness, or unawareness (i.e. cannot see a pedestrian, bicyclist, or vehicle).
Automated vehicles also reduce the potential for risky driver behavior associated with
activities such as not wearing seatbelts, speeding, weaving, red light running, tailgating,
or other actions associated with aggressive driving. While it is believed each level of
automation will increase safety, the determination of “how safe” will depend on the level
of automation.
Security/Reliability/Redundancy – For automated vehicles, these three terms when
linked together, can be defined as being free from natural or manmade danger or disaster,
sabotage, outside influence, or malfunction by including parts of a system that have the
same function of other parts, so if one part fails, the entire system does not fail. This
“systems safety” is achieved when an AV device has features that prevent interference
from outside sources. This promotes dependable and safe vehicle use.
6
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Descriptive Statement: Systems safety is proven by yielding the same results through
repeated testing. In addition, the results have been validated and certified to meet
established specifications and requirements.
Interoperability – Interoperability is defined as the ability of a system to work within, or
use the parts of another system, or accept the services from other systems to enable them
to operate effectively together. These systems include both software and hardware
interoperability.
Descriptive Statement: Software interoperability is achieved through product testing,
product engineering, industry/community partnership, common technology and protocols,
and standard implementation. Hardware interoperability is achieved through the use of
different peripheral devices that are compatible with a particular operating system or
device management software.
The intent of this Working Group is not to define what interoperability parameters of
systems need to be (i.e. CV systems architecture), but rather to define challenges and
opportunities associated with interoperability, such as accommodations within existing
systems, CVs, CVs to signal systems, etc., and the potential incentives to facilitate greater
interoperability or identify disincentives for systems that are not interoperable.
Defining Stakeholders – Stakeholders are people or groups involved in or affected by a
course of action.
Descriptive Statement: The diversity of stakeholders associated with AV applications is
as great as the applications themselves. AV stakeholders include stakeholders from both
the vendor and beneficiary side (including freight and transit). Potential stakeholders
include: vendors/researchers, policy makers/implementers, manufacturers, logistics
services companies, companies with large fleets, and advocates/users.
Dedicated Infrastructure – Infrastructure is intended to mean equipment, space and
surfaces, and other transportation-related items used predominantly or exclusively for AV
applications. Infrastructure can be any device or design that has an associated qualified
material, design, construction, or ITS architecture standard associated with it.
Descriptive Statement: It is expected that infrastructure for AV purposes would have a
gradual implementation. This should be roadway lanes/shoulders or other parts of a
corridor used exclusively for defined AVs, either all day or during select portions of the
day. Similarly, infrastructure for AV applications can be portions of a corridor or just at
intersections (i.e. AV queue jumps). Infrastructure can also be associated with other
corridor devices (signals, road signs, pavement markings, etc.) to allow for improved
connected or automated vehicle interaction in order to provide greater efficiency and
safety within the transportation corridor.
Knowledge Transfer – Knowledge transfer is defined as the methodical replication of
wisdom to others. It is a planned movement of the right skills and information at the right
time to keep a system operating smoothly.
7
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Descriptive Statement: As AV applications and uses continue to evolve, it is critical to
communicate with policy makers (i.e. USDOT, jurisdictions, and other forms of
government), product or application designers, product or application operators and
maintainers, supporting organizations (Department of Highway Safety and Motor
Vehicles [DHSMV], AAA), and daily users (both vehicle users and agencies). A
continuous educational component is important to raise awareness of these AV
applications, their potential benefits (safety, congestion), specifications and/or
requirements, and other rules.
As detailed below, knowledge transfer for this Working Group should consider
knowledge transfer between the following stakeholders:
1. Policy providers (local, state, federal)
2. Products/vendors
3. Organizations (designer, operator, or maintainer and DHSMV, both internal
within an organization and outside organization)
4. Users (drivers, operating agencies)
5. Original equipment manufacturer (OEM) (refers to automotive manufacturer)
6. Enterprise Florida
7. Law enforcement
8. High schools
Priority Issues – Drafting Approach
The Working Group formed five drafting groups to address the six priority issues. One of
the drafting groups addressed two priority issues, Stakeholders and Knowledge Transfer.
Each drafting group wrote a two to three page section on their priority issue(s). Each
priority issue draft was presented to the full Working Group for discussion and
refinement. Each drafting group then revised their draft. All the drafts were combined
into one document and the final document was discussed and refined by the full Working
Group.
All the drafting groups followed a similar format. Some started with an opening
paragraph, then addressed one or more priority challenge. For each priority challenge,
solutions were offered, benefits were provided, a method of proof was stated, and
recommendations were made.
8
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Safety: AV and CV
The National Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that more than 5.6
million automobile crashes occurred in the United States in 2014, resulting in more than
1.6 million injuries and 32,719 fatalities. These crashes exact a toll beyond the pain and
suffering we generally associate with them; collectively they cost billions of dollars in
societal costs that include property damage and lost wages.
Priority Challenge 1: The leading cause of crashes in the United States is driver
error. 1
Potential Solutions:
• Encourage adoption of AV technology by developing regulations and liability
rules that compare the performance of AVs to that of average human drivers.
Instead of taking the position that automated vehicles need to achieve nearperfection before introduction, the guiding principle for policy makers should be
that AV technology should be permitted if and when it is superior to average
human drivers. 2 This is not within FDOT’s current activity framework. That said,
the Department will evaluate the technologies before any deployment is
considered.
• Develop or acquire CV technology to monitor and report reckless driving
behavior for high-risk drivers, such as those convicted of driving under the
influence (DUI) or reckless driving. The technology could be a cell phone app
that collects driving data and alerts other CV drivers and law enforcement
officials if the driver appears to be impaired or reckless. According to the Florida
Traffic Crash Facts Annual Report, 3 about 44 percent of all highway fatalities
involve drivers known or suspected to be impaired by alcohol or drugs.
• Develop or acquire AV and/or CV technology to reduce accidents in other highrisk driving situations, including accidents at intersections, lane-departure
accidents, and wrong-way driving accidents.
• Work with legal experts (judges, liability attorneys, and insurance company
attorneys) to align the law, or interpretation of the law, with the technology as it is
introduced. This may be a shared responsibility, including the developer of the
technology, as well as the project initiators and policy maker at the Department;
outreach function, may include stakeholder groups as well. The Department
stands by to review Agreements and legal languages from technology developers
or other stakeholders.
Benefits:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/812115.pdf
Rand Corporation, Autonomous Vehicle Technology, How to Best Realize Its Social Benefits, 2014.
3 https://firesportal.com/Pages/Public/DHSMVDocuments.aspx
1
2
9
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
•
•
•
Save lives and reduce injuries by reducing driver error.
Reduced insurance claims and overall cost savings associated with reduced
injuries, fatalities, and property damage.
Potential savings associated with the reduction in required road signage and fewer
highway workers needed to direct traffic.
Proof:
• The ultimate proof will be a measurable, statistically significant reduction in
accidents, fatalities, and injuries on Florida highways.
• Additional proof will be a reduction in the number of insurance claims and
product liability cases and cost reductions in other areas.
Recommendations:
• Fund research efforts to develop and improve AV and CV technology that focuses
on pilot projects that demonstrate safety benefits.
• Develop educational material that will encourage adoption of safety-enhancing
automated and CV technology when it becomes available.
• Consider a pilot project focused on developing and implementing CV technology
for the highest risk driving groups, such as drivers convicted of DUI, and for
high-risk accident locations (e.g., intersections) and situations (e.g., lane departure
errors).
Priority Challenge 2: AVs and CVs will operate in mixed traffic with traditional
vehicles for several decades.
Potential Solutions:
• Develop written and video training materials for use in driver education.
• Modify driver’s license exams to include questions regarding AV and CV.
• Require drivers renewing current licenses to take an exam demonstrating basic
knowledge about AVs and CVs.
• Prepare interactive on-line educational tools to educate and test existing drivers
on their knowledge of these new technologies.
• Offer incentives and create outreach material to encourage drivers to adopt AV
and CV technology, including new vehicles and aftermarket products.
• Encourage adoption of new technology through improved traffic efficiency, when
possible.
• Develop guidelines for how AVs interact with traditional driver-operated
vehicles.
Benefits:
• AVs and CVs will save lives by reducing driver error and accidents.
10
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
•
•
Educational and outreach material will help reduce the number of accidents
caused by human drivers who are uninformed about AV technology.
Educational and outreach material will help speed adoption of AV and CV
technology. This will help us realize the benefits sooner.
Proof:
• Metrics to track the effectiveness of regulatory and outreach efforts to encourage
the adoption of safety-enhancing AV and CV technology.
• Reduction in the number of insurance claims and product liability cases.
Recommendations:
• Create training and outreach material to support implementation of AV and CV
technology.
• Create rules for the interaction between AV/CVs and traditional vehicles.
• Modify driving and licensing tests to include material on AV and CV technology
and rules for interaction between AV/CVs and traditional vehicles.
Priority Challenge 3: CV technologies have great potential to improve work zone
safety by providing real-time information on work zones.
Potential Solutions
• Develop a system to collect and distribute real-time work zone information to the
traveling public, FDOT, law enforcement and emergency vehicles, third-party
service providers, and, ultimately, to automated vehicles.
• Develop a strategic plan to install these systems over time throughout the state
based on crash history.
• Coordinate with transportation planning organizations/metropolitan planning
organizations to strategically invest and, as needed, re-invest in these
technologies.
• Identify appropriate facilities/times to test (toll roads, rural limited-access, state
roads, day/night, etc.).
Benefits:
• Improved awareness of work zone being broadcast to traveling public in real-time
(to date, information is not being reported).
• Reduced traffic congestion as a result of queues forming from current operational
constraints.
• Real-time work zone reporting has been identified as a critical piece of
information needed to improve AV’s operational safety; availability will allow
AV developers to integrate real-time work zone information.
11
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
•
•
•
•
Awareness of work zones for FDOT purposes (operations, maintenance,
construction, safety, etc.).
Reduced collisions near work zones.
Improved safety for work zone personnel.
Improved safety for emergency vehicles responding to crashes and other incidents
on Florida’s roadways.
Proof:
• Develop metrics to track the effectiveness of providing real-time information to
the public, considering reduced accidents and improved traffic flow.
• Track use of data by potential user groups (traveling public, FDOT, law
enforcement and emergency vehicles, third-party service providers, and
automated vehicle developers).
Recommendations:
• Selectively implement real-time broadcasting of work zone information using a
short-range wireless network and/or the cellular network.
• Support research to determine the effectiveness (i.e., reduction in congestion and
accidents) of providing this information to drivers.
• Work with automated vehicle developers to determine the appropriate data to
transmit and the best transmission mechanism.
12
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Interoperability: CV
The NHTSA has announced an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding
CVs. It is anticipated that the agency will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking by the
end of 2015, and by the end of 2016, a rule mandating CV equipment in new light
vehicles. In order for the system to work, vehicles will need to clearly communicate with
each other and with infrastructure.
In the case of 5.9 GHz dedicated short-range communications (DSRC) standards,
compliance certification is due to the particular demands placed on the technology.
Compared to other certification programs, there are extraordinary expectations held for
DSRC and exceptional impacts on the DSRC community and, importantly, the driving
public should the system not work properly.
Priority Challenge 1: CV equipment must communicate clearly in order to
effectively help drivers make better decisions.
Potential Solutions:
• Standards are being developed to regulate the performance requirements and the
communication messages that vehicles will send to each other and the
infrastructure.
• The mandate will reference those standards so that all manufacturers are required
to build to the same standards.
• A certification program is being built to test and ensure that vehicles and
equipment will meet the required standards for certification.
• Stay informed and be ready to certify roadside equipment at TERL for
deployment as traffic control devices. Continue to select apps to support as
roadside units (RSU)s are deployed; require forward compatibility with all
hardware purchases; engage TERL with certification process development.
Benefits:
• Uniformity in production leads to efficiency – all equipment has the same
minimum performance requirements so vehicle manufacturers can focus on other
features rather than minimum performance requirements. It also allows OEMs to
easily set the same minimum standards across all suppliers. Though this is not
currently ready with the uniform minimum performance requirement, the
Department may evaluate these considerations at a future date. This may require
forward compatibility with all hardware purchases and may possibly include
standards development process.
• Certification for interoperability also means that individual states or local
deployers do not have to worry about equipment interfacing properly. Local
13
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
agencies and states may focus on deploying and maintaining their roadways and
operations and will not have to invest in their own testing for interoperability.
Proof:
• There are many existing certification programs that enable interoperability. One
of the most notable is the WiFi® Alliance. The WiFi stamp of interoperability
ensures that all WiFi-enabled devices can communicate. In this case, WiFi and
OmniAir are very close to completing an alliance agreement wherein WiFi will
certify the lower layers of the protocol stack and OmniAir the upper.
• There are many other effective programs for certification. The OmniAir
Consortium was founded to promote and support the national deployment of
interoperable DSRC systems through the creation of the OmniAir Certification
Program. By testing for DSRC standards compliance and other protocols that,
together, permit true interoperability, OmniAir ensures that all stakeholders
benefit from certified products and enjoy a reliable and dynamic service
environment.
Recommendations:
• Actively engage in USDOT guidance on certification regarding pilot
deployments.
• For longer-term certification solution, OmniAir is working with the industry to
create an environment where the industry can take part in building a certification
program for CVs.
14
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Dedicated Infrastructure: AV and CV
Priority Challenge 1: Infrastructure modification for implementation of AV and
CV.
Solution:
Identify what modifications or additions to the existing transportation infrastructure and
communication systems will be needed to support implementation of AV and CV
technology.
Benefits:
Establishing and knowing what improvements and additions are needed to the
infrastructure will reduce the time needed to implement and integrate the new
technologies. AV/CV-ready infrastructure will enhance private sector investment in
Florida.
Proof:
Time needed to integrate into the transportation network would be reduced. Florida’s
transportation infrastructure provides the best environments in the nation for AV/CV
applications. Further, Florida is in an excellent position to begin programming
infrastructure investments within its Five-year Work Program. FDOT can implement
changes to new and existing infrastructure by using its mature, systematic design and
specifications standards implementation within a few years.
Recommendations:
• Review the “Automated Vehicle Friendly Infrastructure” by Southwest Research
Institute (attached) and develop a white paper for further discussion on (a) which
specific divisions and staff should be involved in discussions regarding
infrastructure modifications, and (b) identifying specific infrastructure that needs
to be evaluated.
• Develop standards and specifications for use by the Florida Automated Vehicle
effort in the state.
• Create design assumptions to prepare and accommodate AV/CV/ITS on major
projects.
• Update the Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and
Maintenance for Streets and Highways (commonly referred to as the “Florida
Greenbook”).
• Engage with the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices CV/AV
task force. This task force will involve the American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials, NACE, American Public Works
Association, Institute of Transportation Engineers, and others to determine how
the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices may need to be modified to
accommodate new AV and CV advances. FDOT should work with this group to
15
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
ensure that it is influencing the development of these standards as well as in
compliance with any new directions.
Priority Challenge 2: Secure and reliable infrastructure to support connected
automation.
Despite advancements in in-vehicle technology that will enable AVs and CVs, there are
still many challenging environments that will be problematic for these vehicles in the
foreseeable future:
•
•
•
•
•
Dense urban canyons where global navigation satellite system is often unreliable
to enable applications that require lane-level accuracy.
AVs will need the ability to identify work zones and navigate through them safely
as they will not be able to rely on priori maps.
Intersections with high pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
Wireless/interference communications.
Low visibility conditions: rain, fog, dawn, dusk, night, smoke, etc.
Solution:
Investigate secure, reliable, and cost-effective physical and digital infrastructure
enhancements that can be deployed to help CV and automated vehicles to operate even in
these most challenging environments. Potential examples include:
•
•
•
•
•
Deploy high-contrast lane markings optimized for computer vision as well as
human vision.
Deploy retro reflective markings on infrastructure elements to help the AV
localize.
Ultra-wideband tags deployed at key locations to help the AV localize.
Embed an easily distinguishable unique infrared pattern on road signage to make
it “easier” for an AV to interpret the sign. This way the AV does not have to do
optical character recognition, but can get the implied context of the signage
directly from the embedded pattern with less processing required.
Deploy a situational awareness system at key locations to transmit the “state” of
the area (including pedestrians, bicyclists, and other vehicles) to the AV to help
with sensor occlusion.
Benefits:
• Provide reliable and secure operations for CV and automated vehicles to operate
regardless of the roadway conditions and most common weather conditions.
• Limit the situations where the automated or dynamic driving mode will need to
disengage.
• Increase user acceptance and confidence in relying on automated driving for safe
and reliable operations.
16
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Proof:
Investigation of alternative technologies and pilot deployments will demonstrate the
benefits of these technologies.
Recommendations:
• Conduct a project to investigate potential infrastructure enhancements to enable
CV and automated vehicles in challenging environments.
• Identify locations for potential test beds. Deploy and test various combinations of
the technologies.
• Characterize performance improvements from the vehicle’s perspective and the
transportation system’s perspective as a whole.
Priority Challenge 3: Infrastructure dedicated to AVs and CVs.
Solution:
Develop a strategy to deploy infrastructure-ready facilities, such as an AV/CV-only lane.
Benefits:
Advance the adoption and acceptance of AV/CV technologies leading to a decrease in
crashes and increase in mobility.
Proof:
Number of AV/CV vehicles using facility. Comparison of safety and mobility
performance measures for AV/CV facility versus traditional facility.
Recommendation:
• Research, develop, operate, and market a transportation facility, such as an
AV/CV-ready lane.
17
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Security/Reliability/Redundancy: AV and CV
Priority Challenge 1: Security of agency CV infrastructure.
Solution:
FDOT needs to implement a robust firewall and other proven methods to deny
unauthorized attempts to “spoof” or compromise data sent and received from the
infrastructure. Methods to assure authentication must be implemented. In addition, FDOT
needs to implement hardened physical controls to avoid entry by unauthorized persons to
roadside equipment. These controls should also manage modifications allowed by
authorized users as FDOT regularly transfers maintenance responsibilities to third parties,
such as maintaining agencies and roadway contractors.
Benefits:
Vehicles with reliable and redundant CV infrastructure data have a much higher layer of
safety and improved data fusion for dynamic driving behaviors. This results in fewer
scenarios where the autonomous mode must disengage. By securing the CV
infrastructure, the agency will provide public credibility in the data and system. It will
also provide the integrity necessary to assure a safe and secure operating environment.
Proof:
The ability to fuse data from reliable and authenticated sources will make for more
consistent and safe operation for AVs and CVs.
Recommendations:
• Review existing literature on potential cyber attacks on automated vehicles and
support research related to this topic to maintain its leader status.
• Consider implementation of the National Institute of Standards and Technology
security controls. More information is available at:
http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SMA/fisma/controls.html
• Deploy mitigation techniques that can effectively eliminate or minimize the
ability for any cyber attacks to compromise the integrity of communications to
and from AVs and CVs.
• Develop protocols to maintain system integrity while various work is performed
on the system. These protocols could be similar to those used by utility companies
to provide consistent services to their customers.
• Independently test security on a regular basis through testing / hacking /
vulnerability testing and a comprehensive security risk assessment.
• Review and implement USDOT recommendations on this topic to the extent
applicable to avoid duplicity of efforts.
18
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Priority Challenge 2: System of systems approach to transportation security with
AVs and CVs.
Transportation systems are complex systems comprised of numerous interacting
individual components. The introduction of automated and CV technologies will
drastically change the dynamics of this system. One critical aspect of the system is the
security by which vehicles communicate with each other, and how that communication
affects individual and system-level behavior. However, security cannot be approached as
an issue at the individual vehicle level, but rather must be addressed as an emergent
property of the system.
Solution:
Develop a system of systems (SoS) approach to understand and predict system-level
behavior. System-level behavior of complex, interconnected systems is an emergent
property of the system and is tightly coupled to the behavior and interconnectedness of
the individual components that comprise the system as well as the environment in which
the system exists. This means that it cannot be predicted using linear thinking; rather, a
SoS approach is required.
Benefits:
• Greater understanding of security design decisions on the likely emergent
behavior of the traffic system.
• Increased lead time to mitigate potentially crippling effects of a cybersecurity
attack on an AV/CV traffic system.
• Greater resiliency for an AV/CV traffic system to recover from a cybersecurity
attack.
Proof:
Security can be proven using modeling and simulation tools. Development of these
models and simulation tools is necessary since the system described (AV/CV traffic
systems) does not yet exist.
Recommendation:
Conduct a series of projects to develop the necessary SoS modeling and simulation tools
to enable investigation into potential security approaches to AVs and CVs.
Priority Challenge 3: Trusting sensor data and data communications from other
vehicles and infrastructure.
Communications and sensor data may be authenticated, meaning that it is verified to
come from the correct source, but it does not guarantee the validity of the information.
Information can be incorrect due to sensor issues, timing issues, or malicious intent from
a legitimate sensor, vehicle, or infrastructure device.
19
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Solution:
Perform local and global detection of data trust. Compare data from multiple sources and
reduce/increase trust accordingly based upon multiple sources of the same data. For
example, compare LiDAR sensor data and driver response data with vehiclecommunicated data about traffic congestion conditions. If communicated data does not
agree with the other two, then that vehicle should become less “trusted.”
Benefits:
• Decrease possibility of malicious cyber attacks that can disrupt traffic conditions.
• Detect faulty sensors as early as possible.
Proof:
Security can be proven using the modeling and simulation tools, which need to be
developed. Creation of these models and simulation tools is necessary because the system
being described (AV/CV traffic systems) does not yet exist. Modeling and simulation
tools will be adopted.
Recommendations:
• Conduct a project to investigate different trust algorithms for potential
implementation as part of misbehavior detection.
• Develop model to implement trust techniques in AV/CV systems to demonstrate
effectiveness.
• Identify equipment required to implement trust algorithms.
• Model scenarios with varying Trust Value/Accuracy/Confidence to determine
effective approaches without severely limiting the overall information exchange.
• Implement a credentialing system from USDOT based upon the trust algorithms
determined most effective.
• Identify sources of data, access reliability, and implement credentialing in a pilot
project as a demonstration.
20
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Stakeholders and Knowledge Transfer: Autonomous and
Connected Vehicles
KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: THE DRIVING PUBLIC
Priority Challenge 1: Increase awareness among the general public on AV and CV
technologies
Solution:
Create video presentations educating the public about these new technologies. The videos
will be posted on an FDOT web page, shown on pay television, made available on social
media, and provided to the public in DVD format. The videos will be promoted on
television and print media, through public service announcements, and in FDOT and
DHSMV publications. The Department will monitor OEMs regarding the promotion of
any AV and CV technologies along with safety and mobility features and benefits. US
DOT has these resources as well. The Department will incorporate the available
information for the outreach.
Benefits:
The driving public will receive education on the technology behind AV and CV:
•
•
•
•
How will these new vehicles share the road with traditional vehicles?
Will self-driving vehicles be dangerous?
Will CVs violate my right to privacy?
Will I still be able to use my current car, a motorcycle, or a classic car on the
road?
The predicted long-term advantages of increased public awareness of AV and CV:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reduction in crashes.
Reduction in lawsuits and insurance rates.
Increases in fuel efficiency.
Reduction in the environmental impact of over-the-road transportation.
Increased highway lane through-put/more cars traveling closer together.
Decreases in vehicle weights.
Increased mobility for older and handicapped drivers.
The public should be made aware of the reasons AVs are predicted to be safer:
•
•
•
•
Reaction times are much quicker than human reaction times.
Better at lane-keeping than human drivers.
Do not become distracted or drowsy.
Do not run red lights or change lanes suddenly.
21
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
The public should be made aware of how AV and CV technology will benefit drivers:
•
•
•
Traffic routing - automatically using on the fastest route.
Signal timing - automatically changing signals if there is no traffic.
Incident detection - automatically avoiding pile-ups and sending emergency
vehicles to the scene expeditiously.
The public should be educated on how new and existing drivers can adapt to AV and CV:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Joining and leaving vehicle convoys.
Sharing the road with convoys.
Engaging the autonomous features.
When to disengage from autonomous features.
The limitations of autonomous features
The limitations of autonomous vehicle mapping.
Addressing CV privacy issues.
How AV and CV will improve freight safety:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Increased retention of safe and experienced truckers.
Alleviation of driver shortages.
Reduction in driver fatigue.
Improvement in driver lifestyle.
Use of platooning to increase driver rest times.
Load swapping at container freight stations.
Proof:
The assessment of penetration will be based upon the total number of “hits” on the FDOT
web page, plus the number of hits on the social media page. The target is 100,000 hits.
Recommendation:
Create multiple educational videos, public service announcements, printed materials, and
interactive educational tools to reach existing drivers, new drivers, and the trucking
industry with information about the changes that AV and CV will bring.
KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONS, AND
CONSTRUCTION
Priority Challenge 2: Maintenance, operations, and construction personnel need to
be aware of the effect that their activities can have on drivers using AVs or CVs.
Solution:
• Create a training tool for maintenance, operations, and construction personnel,
which will provide training on AV and CV technology.
22
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
•
•
The training tool will provide written and video materials to educate road and
construction crews about the effect that changes in roadway configuration may
have on operation of AV, semi-autonomous vehicles, and CVs.
The training tool will include interactive and on-line educational tools to educate
and test maintenance, operations, and construction personnel on their knowledge
of these new technologies.
Benefits:
Maintenance, operations, and construction personnel will receive education on:
• How to warn to drivers to disengage from autonomous mode.
• How to provide CV data to CV-equipped vehicles.
• How to provide radio or visual warnings of construction zones.
• How to inform map service providers of changes in roadway and exit
configuration.
Proof:
The assessment of the effectiveness will be based upon the number of maintenance,
operations, and construction personnel who complete the training tool on AV and CV
technology. Crash data can also be assessed for the before and after period to evaluate the
effectiveness of the AV/CV technology.
Recommendation:
FDOT will develop a training tool for maintenance, operations, and construction
personnel to receive education in AV and CV technology.
KNOWLEDGE TRANSFER: TRANSPORTATION PLANNERS
Priority Challenge 3: AVs and CVs will create changes in inner city, suburban, and
rural land use. In addition, AV and CV have the potential to produce substantial
environmental benefits, including substantial increases in energy efficiency,
reduction in overall number of vehicles, reduction in average vehicle weight,
increase in use of vehicles powered by electricity from low-carbon sources,
reduction in need for more and wider roadways, and an overall reductions in vehicle
emissions. Transportation planners need to be educated and informed about the
changes they should expect and should incorporate the expected effects into their
transportation plans and environmental planning.
Solution:
FDOT could create an educational program to educate and inform transportation planners
with the goal of encouraging them to create and report metrics on the predicted effects of
AV and CV technology on over-the-road transportation efficiency and environmental
quality.
23
White Paper
Technology and Infrastructure Working Group
Benefits:
Planners will become informed on the expected effects:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Highway throughput and roadway density.
Vehicle weight and efficiency.
Need for remote parking in urban areas.
Reduction in the need for inner city parking.
Predicted reduction in the individual ownership of vehicles.
Effect of freeing up downtown land for higher density usage.
Planners will begin looking at metrics to measure the effects of:
•
•
•
•
•
The extent that signal control and CV technology can reduce congestion.
A predicted increase of rental vehicles and ride-sharing services.
The willingness of drivers to work during commutes.
Commute times and population density in urban areas.
Last mile connectivity to commuter rail and air transportation.
Proof:
The effectiveness of the metrics will be based first on the ability of planners to
approximate the effects of these technologies on transportation planning. At the outset it
can be expected that the metrics will be rough estimates, which will become more
accurate and refined over time. However, the publication of metrics, no matter how
crude, is a start in the process of mathematically analyzing the advantages and
disadvantages of these technologies.
Recommendations:
• Prepare videos and written materials for transportation planners, educating them
on the effects that AV and CV are expected to have on transportation planning,
energy usage, and environmental quality.
• Establish a working group of transportation planners who will be assigned the
task of developing metrics (e.g. reduction in carbon dioxide per passenger mile,
etc.) to quantify the advantages and disadvantages of these technologies.
24