[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-295636-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-295636-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","tno-report-tno-2021-r12633-overview-of-standards-and-evaluation-criteria","TNO report - TNO 2021 R12633 - Overview of standards and evaluation criteria","","This report provides an overview of available standards and evaluation criteria for interaction between drivers and other road users with automated driving systems (ADS) and advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). It distinguishes criteria relevant to driver–automated vehicle interaction from those relevant to automated vehicles interacting with other road users, covering UN regulation on ALKS, HMI standards, distraction-related criteria, and the limited existence of eHMI and implicit communication standards. It also summarizes ongoing research and relevant research groups.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/tno-report-tno-2021-r12633-overview-of-standards-and-evaluation-criteria/295636/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/tno-report-tno-2021-r12633-overview-of-standards-and-evaluation-criteria/295636.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Aria Callaghan","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-27","2026-09-18",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",15,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What does the report cover overall?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It summarizes available standards and evaluation criteria for driver–automated vehicle interaction and for automated vehicles interacting with other road users, across ADS and ADAS.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"Which regulation is highlighted for driver–vehicle interaction?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"UN regulation No. 157 (2021) is discussed, including procedures for driver unavailability and takeover request non-response, with specified maximum latencies and required system information.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Are there established evaluation criteria for how automated vehicles communicate to other road users?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"The report notes that for eHMIs and especially for implicit communication via behavioral patterns, few standards or evaluation criteria currently exist and further development is needed.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},295636,1789721149,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":140,"language":141,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":142,"faqs":143,"seo_title":144,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":80,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},962084926284,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_29158cc5080c5b710cf443261637dec0","TNO report  \nTNO 2021 R12633  \nAn overview of standards and evaluation criteria to assess the interaction of drivers and other road users with automated vehicles  \nDate 21 December 2021  \nAuthor(s) Jan Souman, Marijke van Weperen, Esra van Dam  \nNumber of pages 34 (incl. appendices) Number of appendices  \nSponsor  \nProject name  \nProject number  \nProject manager Reviewer  \nNetherlands Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management DriVeR  \n060.50659  \nMarika HoedemaekerReviewerJeroen Hogema  \nJeroen Hogema  \n5700 AT Helmond The Netherlands  \n[www.tno.nl](www.tno.nl)  \nT +31 88 866 57 29 F +31 88 866 88 62  \nAll rights reserved.  \nNo part of this publication may be reproduced and/or published by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without the previous written consent of TNO.  \nIn case this report was drafted on instructions, the rights and obligations of contracting parties are subject to either the General Terms and Conditions for commissions to TNO, or the relevant agreement concluded between the contracting parties. Submitting the report for inspection to parties who have a direct interest is permitted.  \n© 2021 TNO  \nSummary  \nIn this report, an overview of available standards and criteria for the interaction of drivers and other road users with automated driving systems (ADS) and advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) is provided. We also provide information about ongoing research and relevant research groups. In summarizing the results, we distinguish between standards and criteria relevant to the interaction between driver and automated vehicle on the one hand and to the interaction between automated vehicles and other road users on the other. Here, the term ‘automated vehicles’ is taken to refer to both vehicles with ADAS and vehicles with ADS.  \nInteraction between driver and automated vehicle:  \nUN regulation No. 157 (2021) provides standards regarding Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS) . In particular, it specifies the procedure for dealing with driver unavailability as well as for the case when the driver does not respond to a takeover request. For this, concrete maximum latencies are provided. It also specifies the minimal system information that should be provided to the driver.  \nThis regulation provides the most concrete and specific standards directly concerning the interaction between driver and automated vehicle currently found in the literature. Several authors have provided guidelines for this type of interaction, but so far this has not resulted in evaluation criteria. Moreover, standards exist for classic HMI design, concerning aspects such as the size, colour and location of displays and controls. Although not developed with driving automation in mind, these standards are nevertheless also relevant for the interfaces of ADAS and ADS.  \nAlthough few evaluation criteria for the interaction between driver and automated vehicle exist, the literature provides some criteria for driver distraction, which can bethe result of using ADAS or ADS. Glances away from the forward roadway longer than 2 s have been found to correlate significantly with the occurrence of accidents. Accordingly, NHTSA (2010) guidelines provide recommendations for maximum time spent looking away from the roadway.  \nInteraction between automated vehicles and other road users:  \nEven though external HMIs (eHMIs) for automated vehicles are an active topic of research, few standards or evaluation criteria exist. An exception is the text size used on an eHMI. ISO 9241-303 provides general standards for text size on visual displays to be readable. However, the literature suggests that the text size as specified by this standard for computer displays may be much larger than necessary for eHMIs.  \nImplicit communication of (automated) vehicles by means of patterns of behaviour in certain traffic situations has been studied far less. Standards or evaluation criteria still need to be developed for this topic.  \nAbbreviations  \nADAD","cbCaic3Mg08spZJ3","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaic3Mg08spZJ3","pdf",414416,34,"English","# Summary\n# Abbreviations\n# 1 Introduction\n# 2 Methodology\n## 2.1 Definitions\n## 2.2 Methods\n# 3 Results\n## 3.1 Driver-vehicle interaction\n## 3.2 Interaction between automated vehicles and other road users\n# 4 Conclusions\n## 4.1 Standards and criteria","[{\"question\":\"What does the report cover overall?\",\"answer\":\"It summarizes available standards and evaluation criteria for driver–automated vehicle interaction and for automated vehicles interacting with other road users, across ADS and ADAS.\"},{\"question\":\"Which regulation is highlighted for driver–vehicle interaction?\",\"answer\":\"UN regulation No. 157 (2021) is discussed, including procedures for driver unavailability and takeover request non-response, with specified maximum latencies and required system information.\"},{\"question\":\"Are there established evaluation criteria for how automated vehicles communicate to other road users?\",\"answer\":\"The report notes that for eHMIs and especially for implicit communication via behavioral patterns, few standards or evaluation criteria currently exist and further development is needed.\"}]","TNO report - TNO 2021 R12633 - Overview of standards and evaluation criteria | PDF",86]