Literature Review on

Recent International Activity in 

Cooperative Vehicle–Highway 

Automation Systems

The Exploratory Advanced Research Program
Foreword 

This literature review supports the main report, Recent International Activity in Cooperative 

Vehicle–Highway Automation Systems (Pub. No. FHWA-HRT-12-033). These publications have been 

prepared with the support of the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Exploratory Advanced 

Research Program under the technical supervision of the FHWA Turner–Fairbank Highway Research 

Program’s Office of Operations Research and Development. This work was initiated to provide 

the U.S. transportation research community with a better understanding of the current state of 

research and development and to encourage broader thinking about cooperative vehicle–highway 

automation systems based on developments in other countries. This topic has received increased 

attention in the industrialized world, even while interest in the United States has been at a relatively 

low level in recent years. It is now time that the United States take a fresh look at the technical 

and institutional issues associated with vehicle automation and its implications for the future of the 

surface transportation system, particularly when interest in the topic has been growing within the 

automotive and information technology industries.

Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation 

in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of 

the information contained in this document. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or 

manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are 

considered essential to the objective of the document. 

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high quality information to serve Government, 

industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are 

used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA 

periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous 

quality improvement.

Joseph I. Peters

Director, Office of Operations Research

and Development

Debra S. Elston

Director, Office of Corporate Research, 

Technology, and Innovation Management 
i
ii

Technical Report Documentation Page 

1. Report No.

FHWA-HRT-13-025

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle

Literature Review on Recent International Activity in Cooperative 

Vehicle–Highway Automation Systems

5. Report Date

December 2012

6. Performing Organization Code: 

7. Author(s)

S.E. Shladover

8. Performing Organization Report No. 

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

University of California PATH Program

1357 S.46th Street, Bldg. 452

Richmond, CA 94804-4648

Cambridge Systematics, Inc.

100 Cambridge Park Drive, Suite 400

Cambridge, MA 02140-2322

10. Work Unit No.

11. Contract or Grant No.

Contract DTFH61-06-D-00004, Task Order CA04-070

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Office of Corporate Research, Technology, and Innovation 

Management

Federal Highway Administration

6300 Georgetown Pike

McLean, VA 22101-2296

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Final Report, January 2011 – December 2012

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

HRTM-30

15. Supplementary Notes

FHWA’s Contracting Officer’s Task Manager (COTM): Robert Ferlis, HRDO-2

16. Abstract

This literature review supports the report, Recent International Activity in Cooperative Vehicle–Highway Automation Systems. It

reviews the published literature in English dating from 2007 or later about non-U.S.-based work on cooperative vehicle–

highway automation systems. This review covers work performed in Europe and Japan, with application to transit buses, heavy 

trucks, and passenger cars. In addition to fully automated driving of the vehicles (without human intervention), it also covers 

partial automation systems, which automate subsets of the total driving process.

Recent International Activity in Cooperative Vehicle–Highway Automation Systems is published separately as FHWA-HRT-12-033. 

17. Key Words

Automated Vehicles, Autonomous Systems, 

Autonomous Vehicles, Cooperative Automation 

Systems, Intelligent Transportation Systems, Personal 

Rapid Transit Vehicles, Public Transport Systems, 

Vehicle Automation Systems, Vehicle-to Infrastructure 

Cooperation, Vehicle-to-Vehicle Communications.

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the 

National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages

25

22. Price

N/A

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized
iii
iv

Table of Contents

Introduction 1

General Overview of Relevant Current International Activities 2

Automated Transit Applications 6

Automated Trucking Applications 8

Automated Driving of Cars 10

Partially Automated Car Applications (Control Assistance) 11

Driver Guidance and Cooperative Collision Warning Applications 12

General Driver–Vehicle Interaction Issues 13

Reference List 16

Introductory–General Concepts 17

Automated Transit 19

Automated Trucking 20

Automated Passenger Cars 21

Partially Automated Vehicles (Control Assistance) 22

Driver Guidance and Cooperative Collision Warning 22

Driver–Vehicle Interactions 24
Introduction 

This literature review covers recent 

international activities on development, 

testing, and deployment of CVHAS. To 

clarify what this scope means in practice:

» Recent means since 2007, so that the 

focus is on current activities rather than 

older activities that are likely to have 

been superseded by now or may already 

be familiar.

» International means that the main focus 

is on activities outside of the United 

States, because the United States’ 

activities are already familiar. There will 

be occasional references to activities in 

the United States to help set the context 

for the overseas activities and to offer 

points of comparison.

» Cooperative vehicle–highway automation

means that the systems involve some form 

of vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V), vehicle-toinfrastructure (V2I), or infrastructureto-vehicle (I2V) cooperation or 

interactions with the driver in partially 

automated systems, but this review 

generally avoids addressing the fully 

autonomous systems that do not 

involve active cooperation. 

» Automation covers multiple degrees 

of automation of the driving function, 

ranging from driver warning and control 

assistance to partial automation and 

full automation. 

To expand on the last bullet item, the 

full range of levels of cooperation and 

automation is shown schematically 

in figure 1. The review here tends to 

emphasize the upper and right-hand 

portions of this figure rather than the 

lower and left–hand portions.

This review focuses on the documentation 

that exists in the English language reference 

documents that are publicly available 

through professional journals, conference 

proceedings, technical reports, and Web 

sites. In some cases, documentation of 

important international activities is not 

available in these forms. Much information 

is disseminated through brochures, 

conference presentations that exist only in 

PowerPoint®, or in private discussions and 

visits to other research teams. This richer 

body of information is not addressed in 

this report but is covered in the full report, 

Recent International Activity in Cooperative 

Vehicle–Highway Automation Systems (Pub. 

No. FHWA-HRT-12-033), which includes 

meetings with key participants involved in 

major international projects.

The emphasis of this review is on 

documentation of broad programmatic 

issues, such as project goals, concepts 

of operations, schedules, budgets, and 

deployment strategies. There is no attempt 

to report on highly technical details of 

research projects. This means that there is 

only limited coverage of publications in the 

most respected professional journals and 

in the conferences sponsored by technical 

societies, such as the Institute of Electrical 

and Electronics Engineers, which tend to 

focus on those technical details. There 

is more emphasis on the papers for the 

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 

World Congresses, which provide the 

broader programmatic views, and the more 

general trade press. 1
2

General Overview 

of Relevant Current 

International Activities

The dominant international activities 

in CVHAS, as indeed in all of ITS, are 

sponsored by the Japanese government 

and the European Commission. Although 

Figure 1. Chart. Full range of automation and cooperation alternatives. 

© Steve E. Shladover

2

they have the largest budgets and are 

most inclined to publicize their work in 

international technical forums, they are not 

the only ones to be active. There are also 

substantial national programs of research 

and development in individual European 

countries and in other Asian countries, 

particularly Korea and China. Because those 

activities are typically lower profile, they 

will be highlighted in this overview section 
3

before getting into specific applications of 

CVHAS technology.

The current projects related to CVHAS 

have antecedents in earlier generations of 

projects, which in some cases have very 

extensive paper trails of publications that 

are not reviewed here because they would 

overwhelm the more current information.

Several general trends are evident in 

reviewing the recent international literature 

on CVHAS topics:

» There is very little information based on 

industry research and development, but 

virtually everything is associated with 

public sector projects. Although this may 

be in part because of industry interests 

in keeping their information proprietary, 

there are some other important factors 

to consider. Particularly because we 

are focusing on cooperative systems, 

these require close interaction with the 

public roadway infrastructure. Industry 

is reluctant to get too far out in front 

of the public sector and would not 

want to invest effort in cooperative 

systems without assurance that their 

public sector counterparts are actively 

engaged and thinking along similar 

lines. Because deployment horizons for 

public infrastructure tend to be long, 

industry is more inclined to focus their 

own investments in other areas where 

they can achieve an earlier return on 

those investments.

» The large majority of available information 

is about the technical characteristics of 

the systems that are being developed 

or considered for development, with 

relatively limited information about the 

non-technical issues that could impede 

deployment, such as costs, legal, and 

institutional issues.(1,2) This could be 

because the technologies are not yet 

ready for deployment or because these 

issues are too specific to the deployment 

locales and countries to merit attention in 

international publications. Regardless of 

the reasons, it is an unfortunate omission, 

because it deprives us of the opportunity 

to learn from others’ experience with 

these issues.

» The European Commission only began 

to give serious attention to cooperative 

systems around 2004—after previously 

keeping its infrastructure and vehicle 

activities separate—but since that time 

it has increasingly focused stronger 

attention on cooperative systems. 

Within the past 2 years, the European 

Commission has given considerably 

more attention to automated driving 

systems, and some of its senior managers 

have voiced a strong belief that this 

is the inevitable future of ITS. This has 

been manifested in a few new research 

activities, with the likelihood of more 

coming in future calls for proposals.

» The activities in Japan are divided by 

government ministries, which have 

followed different trends. The Ministry 

of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and 

Tourism (MLIT) was noted for investing 

in very ambitious automation initiatives 

in the early– to mid– 1990s, but by 1997 

it had changed its definition of AHS

from automated highway systems to 

advanced cruise–assist highway systems, 

which mainly provide warnings to 

drivers rather than control assistance or 
4

automation. The current MLIT program, 

Smartway, is focused on deployment of 

roadside infrastructure to support these 

cooperative systems on highways, but is 

no longer doing much research.(3)

» Japan’s National Police Agency has long 

emphasized urban traffic management 

and control, which is one of its primary 

responsibilities. Since about 2005, it has 

invested heavily in cooperative safetyenhancing systems for urban arterials, 

especially intersections, through its 

Driving Safety Support Systems (DSSS) 

research and development program.(4) This 

involves intensive I2V communications to 

deliver safety warnings to drivers (but 

not control assistance or automation).

» Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and 

Industry (METI) has a long history of 

involvement with vehicle automation 

technology. Until a few years ago, 

its projects were strictly based on 

autonomous vehicles, without any 

cooperation with other vehicles or with the 

infrastructure. Since 2008, however, METI 

has been sponsoring the large Energy ITS 

project, developing an automated truck 

platoon based on V2V cooperation.(5) The 

relationship of these truck platoons to the 

roadway infrastructure has gone through 

various political phases since the project 

began; thus, at different times it was based 

on dedicated truck lane infrastructure and 

on mixing the automated truck platoons 

with conventional non-automated traffic.

» In all countries, the cooperative ITS 

projects are more heavily focused on 

traveler information and driver safety–

warning applications than on automated 

driving. Some of these activities are 

cited in this review to provide the 

context for future development of 

automation capabilities.

» The cooperative automated driving 

applications under current research and 

development are mainly focused on 

public transit vehicles and trucks rather 

than on private passenger cars. This 

appears to reflect the recognition that 

deployment opportunities will come 

earlier for these vehicle types than for 

passenger cars.

There have been a few prior scans of overseas 

developments relevant to the scope of this 

review. The Federal Highway Administration 

sponsored an international scanning tour of 

ITS safety applications in 2006.(6) Although 

most of the topics covered in that scan were 

related to traffic management systems, it also 

included adaptive cruise control (ACC) and invehicle safety-warning systems. The Federal 

Transit Administration and the ITS Joint 

Program Office sponsored a European scan 

of automated bus guidance systems that the 

Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways 

(PATH) led in 2005, exposing transit industry 

stakeholders to systems that used computer 

vision, magnetic, and mechanical guidance 

systems in operation.(7)

Three major European integrated projects 

on cooperative ITS systems were concluded 

with a major demonstration in Amsterdam, 

the Netherlands, in March 2010. Smaller 

demonstrations were provided at the ITS 

World Congress in Stockholm, Sweden, in 

September 2009. The researchers working 

on these projects—CVIS,(8) COOPERS,(9) and 

SAFESPOT(10)—developed the communication 

architecture and technology to use multiple 

communication media to connect vehicles 
with the infrastructure and with each other 

and also demonstrated a wide variety of 

cooperative applications. These applications 

included advanced driver assistance systems 

that provided a limited level of automation 

of the driving function (providing awareness 

of the hazards in the driving environment), 

without taking control of the vehicle motions.

The next generation of European 

Commission sponsored integrated projects, 

which are in some sense follow-ons to 

those just mentioned, are also focusing on 

collision warning and control assistance—

eCoMove and interactIVe.(11,12) As the name 

implies, eCoMove emphasizes the use of 

cooperative systems to reduce energy 

consumption, greenhouse gases, and 

pollutant emissions. The project interactIVe, 

however, emphasizes the integration within 

the vehicle of different warning systems, 

rather than the V2V or V2I cooperation.

The large majority of the references 

described here are associated with 

either European Commission–sponsored 

projects that involve collaborations among 

researchers in several countries or Japanese 

projects; however, these are not the only 

relevant activities. It is worth noting that 

there are national programs in a variety of 

countries, including the European countries 

that also participate in European-wide 

projects. There have also been a few papers 

from private companies that are working 

on their own and are not associated with 

national or international programs.

A general overview of cooperative ITS work 

in China was presented at the 2007 ITS 

World Congress in Beijing, but this overview 

does not pay strong attention to automated 

vehicle applications.(13) The Dutch have 

been leaders in cooperative ITS, and they 

have included partially automated systems 

(speed control) within their program, 

which hosted an international competition 

for cooperative system developers.(14,15) 

Germany has long had a strong national 

transportation technology research program, 

the current generation of which is known 

as AKTIV.

(16) The German projects tend to 

be dominated by the automotive original 

equipment manufacturers, who have not 

been enthusiastic about fully automated 

driving. In contrast, the French national 

projects (under the umbrella program Prédit) 

are more dominated by the researchers, with 

a somewhat more theoretical and academic 

perspective.(17) The Germans and French have 

even worked together under a program called 

Deufrako (a contraction of the German words 

meaning German–French cooperation).

Although it does not get as much international 

attention, Spain also has a national research 

program—funded as basic research rather 

than as transportation application research—

which has placed a strong emphasis on 

automated driving.(18,19) Sweden has shown 

particular interest in the extent to which 

cooperative systems could be implemented 

by using cellular communications technology 

rather than dedicated short-range 

communication, motivated in large part 

by the corporate interests of the company 

Ericsson, which made a major marketing 

push on this point when the ITS World 

Congress was in Stockholm.(20,21)

One additional reference worth citing is a 

Delphi panel study of international experts’ 

attitudes toward the future prospects for 

a wide range of driver assistance system 5
services, up to full automation, that was 

conducted by the Technical University 

of Delft.(22) The panel members’ attitudes 

indicated considerable concern about how 

long it would take for vehicle automation to 

become reality. 

The results from the Delphi panel study were 

probably heavily influenced by European 

concerns about the “Vienna Convention,” 

which always comes up in international 

discussions about vehicle automation. This 

is a reference to the Vienna Convention 

on Road Traffic, a 1968 treaty under the 

United Nations Economic and Social Council 

intended to facilitate international road traffic 

and increase road safety by standardizing 

traffic rules among countries.(23) Although 

this treaty has been ratified and signed by 

most European countries and a few more in 

other parts of the world, it does not apply 

in North America or Japan. Article 8.5 of the 

treaty states, “Every driver shall at all times 

be able to control his vehicle or to guide 

his animals.” Point 7 of a supplementary 

European agreement adds the reinforcing 

language, “Every driver shall have his vehicle 

under control so as to be able to exercise 

due and proper care at all times....” Senior 

European automotive industry officials 

have pointed out that this language is not 

unchangeable, and that exceptions could be 

made when vehicle automation technology 

is demonstrated to be safe.

Automated Transit 

Applications 

Some of the strongest progress in vehicle 

automation has already been made in the 

field of transit. Indeed, one could consider 

the wide variety of airport people movers 

and automated urban metros to be 

examples of existing deployed automated 

vehicles, but these are mechanically captive 

to their guideways, so they are generally 

outside the scope of this review.

The heaviest overseas activity in automated 

transit applications is in Europe, and some of 

the European interest has migrated to China. 

In Japan, Toyota invested considerable effort 

in its Intermediate Mode Transit System 

(IMTS) of automated mini–buses, which 

were used to shuttle 10 million passengers 

around the grounds of the international Aichi 

Expo in the summer of 2005. Since this is a 

bit earlier than the period defined for this 

review, it is not covered here, but it remains 

an important development. Other than that, 

Japan has not been active with automated 

buses for reasons that are peculiar to national 

geography and urban transit operations. 

The large Japanese cities have extremely 

high population density and very well–

developed rail networks (e.g., commuter rail 

and urban metros). Buses are only used for 

feeder services or for primary transit service 

in smaller cities, so they do not have much 

status, and there is no motivation to invest in 

upgrading them. If a higher quality of service 

is needed, a rail line is built to provide it.

The majority of the European automated 

transit work has been based on the 

“CyberCars” concept defined and 

promoted by Michel Parent at INRIA in 

France. He has succeeded in obtaining 

European Commission support for a 

long sequence of projects to develop, 

demonstrate, and evaluate automated 

driverless vehicles at low speeds in 6
7

guidance system that enabled it to 

operate under fully automated control 

on a busway, where it was partially 

segregated from other traffic and 

pedestrians. It was put into public service 

for a brief time in Eindhoven but was then 

withdrawn from service, although it is still 

operating in Douai, France, where it is known 

as Le Tram. It has not been clear whether the 

termination of Phileas service was because of 

problems with the guidance system or with 

other innovative systems that it also contains. 

The Korea Railroad Research Institute under 

the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime 

Affairs, has licensed the FROG guidance 

system used in the Phileas bus to use in its 

BiModal Tram guided bus, but it is not clear 

how close to deployment that is based on 

the brochure that was distributed at the ITS 

World Congress in Busan, South Korea, in 

October 2010.

The broader challenges associated with 

deployment strategies for automated 

short-distance transit vehicles have been 

studied by Southampton University in the 

United Kingdom.(33,34) They considered the 

initial applications to be at low speeds in 

pedestrian zones, with later applications 

becoming essentially dual-mode guideway 

operations. They found transit operators 

concerned about the economic risks of 

these new systems. Their study found the 

most promising applications to be:(34)

» Public transport where conventional 

transport is restricted, such as in historic 

city centers.

» Public transport in low–demand (e.g., 

rural) areas or at low–demand times 

(e.g., night).

pedestrian zones, where the automated 

vehicles have very limited interactions 

with other vehicles but need to focus on 

not hitting pedestrians. In some cases the 

automated driverless vehicles operate on 

guideways that are mostly segregated 

from other traffic. The CyberCars work 

has been documented in many papers, 

of which only a few of the most recent 

are cited here.(24,25) The most recent of 

the projects in the CyberCars sequence 

is called CityMobil, which concluded in 

May 2011 with a conference and public 

demonstration. That project, with vehicle 

demonstrations including an automated 

bus in Castellon, Spain; smaller people 

movers in La Rochelle, France, and Rome, 

Italy; and the Heathrow Airport ULTra 

PRT (personal rapid transit) system, is 

documented in several papers and has a 

substantial Web site.(26,27,28)

Through collaboration between INRIA and 

researchers in China, there has been an 

upsurge of interest in CyberCars in China 

in recent years, evidenced by a variety of 

technical papers on the subject.(29,30,31) This 

has even led to an automated vehicle that 

was claimed to be open to the public in 

Shanghai since 2007(31) and a demonstration 

at the 2010 Shanghai World Expo.(30)

The technology is mildly cooperative, 

in that it uses special lane markings in 

the infrastructure to provide a guidance 

reference for the vehicle.

One of the most important European 

automated vehicle projects was the 

Phileas bus, developed by an industrial 

consortium in the Eindhoven region of 

the Netherlands.(32) This bus had many 

advanced features, including a magnetic 
8

» Feeder services to park and ride or 

transit terminals.

» Systems to cover the “last mile” not 

served by conventional transit.

» Special purpose transportation for theme 

parks, campuses, or exhibition centers.

The main barriers to deployment were 

found to be:(34)

» End–user familiarity with conventional 

public transport systems.

» General negative perception of public 

transport in the “private car society.”

» Organizational issues for coordination 

with existing transit systems.

» Operators and decisionmakers 

perceiving high risk because of their 

unfamiliarity with automated transport 

systems.

» Skepticism toward automated systems 

operating in environments shared with 

other traffic.

» Legal and certification issues.

» Securing funding for implementation 

and operation.

As the CityMobil project has been drawing 

to a close, it has published a large collection 

of reports on issues associated with 

deployment of automated transit systems 

on its Web site.(35) 

Automated Trucking 

Applications 

From 1996 to 2004, the two CHAUFFEUR 

projects sponsored by the European 

Commission were among the most 

prominent ITS research projects. In these 

projects, automated truck platoons were 

developed and tested, producing some 

dramatic results, including very favorable 

indications about the potential for fuel 

savings by reducing aerodynamic drag. 

The CHAUFFEUR system used V2V 

communication for close coordination of 

truck movements, but it had no cooperation 

with the roadside. By the end of the second 

CHAUFFEUR project, the project team was 

convinced that they would have to proceed 

in either one of two different directions—(1) 

a fully automated platoon of three or more 

trucks that would have to operate only in 

a dedicated lane segregated from other 

traffic or (2) driver assistance systems, such 

as ACC and lane–keeping assistance, with 

the driver remaining fully engaged in the 

driving process. Because they saw no real 

prospects for getting dedicated truck lanes 

built in Europe, they stopped work on the 

fully automated platoon option. Subsequent 

European Commission projects (e.g., SPARC 

and PEIT) focused on improved drive–

by–wire drivetrains for trucks and truck 

automation at low speeds in terminals rather 

than on highways.

Automated truck platoons returned to 

attention in the KONVOI project sponsored 

by the German government (under 

economics and technology rather than 

transportation) from 2005–2009. The 

German government funded KONVOI 

approximately €4 million ($5.1 million), 

with industry cost share bringing the total 

budget to about €5.5 million ($7 million). 

This project focused on determining 

impacts of automated vehicles on traffic 

and the environment, rather than on 

developing technology, but the researchers 
9

implemented their experimental system 

from scratch themselves rather than 

building on the prior work developed under 

CHAUFFEUR, SPARC, or PEIT (which had 

a different industry partner). The concept 

of operations that the researchers tested, 

with a lead vehicle driven manually and 

police escorts following them on public 

autobahns, was dictated by government 

agency constraints rather than representing 

what they would actually have expected 

to deploy. The KONVOI researchers do 

not expect to be able to add dedicated 

truck lanes, so they believe that they are 

compelled to coexist with other traffic. 

KONVOI has not been very visible on 

the international scene, but it is notable 

for having conducted a set of tests of a 

four-truck platoon on public highways in 

Germany. The platoon drove over 3,000 

km (1,864 mi), with the first truck manually 

driven and the other three following under 

automatic control, with a police escort 

vehicle behind them to alert drivers of other 

vehicles that would be passing them. During 

these test drives, the platoon encountered 

15 instances of cut-ins by drivers of 

private cars squeezing in between their 

trucks, requiring the platoon to separate 

automatically. Six of these cut-ins occurred 

when the trucks were only 10–15 m (33–49 

ft) apart. Although the KONVOI experiments 

on a test track showed substantial fuel 

savings, the savings while driving in public 

traffic were significantly reduced because 

of speed variations imposed by interference 

from other traffic and the disruptions to the 

platoon from cut–ins. There have been a few 

English language papers about KONVOI, 

mostly very technical, but one that provides 

a more general and informative overview 

of the project, as well as reporting on a 

driving simulator study of driver responses 

to driving in truck platoons, can be found 

via reference 36.

The research team that led the KONVOI 

project at the technical university RWTH 

Aachen is one of the partners in the European 

Commission-sponsored SARTRE project 

(SAfe Road TRains for the Environment). 

(See references, 37, 38, 39, and 40.) SARTRE 

is led by the automotive consultants Ricardo 

from the United Kingdom, and the major 

vehicle industry partners are at Volvo, 

both automobile and trucking companies. 

SARTRE has developed and tested a concept 

of an automated platoon led by a truck 

driven manually, with a mixture of trucks 

and cars following close behind in order 

to save fuel and emissions. Like KONVOI, 

the researchers of SARTRE operated these 

“road trains” on public highways in mixed 

traffic. Although their original concept 

definition contemplated gaps between 

vehicles as short as 2 m (6.6 ft), the tests 

were conducted at gaps of 4 m (13.2 ft). They 

addressed some of the human factors issues 

in a driving simulator experiment(39) and gave 

test track demonstrations in late 2010 and at 

the project conclusion in September 2012, 

in addition to a demonstration on a public 

highway in Spain in the spring of 2012.(40) 

In addition to the major integrated projects, 

there have been some smaller research 

projects that have addressed truck platooning 

in Europe. Scania simulated the fuel saving 

potential of automated truck platoons and 

then conducted a limited field experiment with 

two trucks coupled at unspecified vehiclefollowing gaps using an ACC system.(41) A 

research group at RWTH Aachen developed 
10

three 1/14-scale model trucks in support of a 

cooperative platooning experiment, but there 

are serious questions about whether this test 

will be able to produce realistic estimates of 

performance or fuel savings.(42)

By far the most ambitious current activity on 

truck automation is the Energy ITS project, 

funded by Japan’s METI. This is a 5-year 

project, funded at $12 million per year: 

Ninety percent of the funding is supporting 

the truck-platooning work, and the rest of 

the funding is being devoted to developing 

methods of evaluating the greenhouse gas 

savings that can be achieved from other ITS 

applications. The main focus of this project 

is on saving energy, and hence, greenhouse 

gas emissions, from truck operations.(43) 

The work is being conducted by a variety 

of university researchers, led by the Japan 

Automobile Research Institute, but it does 

not have active participation by the truck 

manufacturers in Japan.

The operational concepts for the Energy 

ITS project have shifted over time based 

on political pressures from sponsors, so the 

project researchers have gone back and 

forth over the issue of whether the truck 

platoons would be operating on dedicated 

truck lanes or in mixed traffic. There has been 

some work on modeling and simulation to 

evaluate the impacts that deployment would 

have on transportation and environmental 

issues, but the majority of the effort has 

been devoted to development and testing 

of the technology on a platoon of three 

trucks.(44,45,46) There has also been some 

attention devoted to the issue of how to 

communicate information about the status 

of the automated platoon to the drivers, but 

this issue is sure to need a lot more work.(47)

Automated Driving of Cars

There is very little current activity that 

addresses fully automated driving of 

passenger cars (other than the autonomous 

vehicle research that is outside the scope 

of this review). In recent literature, there 

appears to be only one significant project 

that points entirely in this direction, which 

is Toyota’s research on a tightly coupled 

platoon of automated cars.(48,49) In this 

research, Toyota has concentrated on fuel 

saving; thus, they have designed their car–

following control to maximize smoothness 

while also maintaining a small gap 

among cars and have, as a result, shown 

better fuel–saving results than in earlier 

work. Toyota in Europe has produced an 

animation that showcases their future 

vision of fully automated driving, which is 

posted on YouTube®.(50)

BMW presented a paper that mentioned 

vehicle automation for special purposes, 

such as remotely controlled parking of 

vehicles in a garage and training race car 

drivers to make an optimal drive around a 

race track, but these are not mainstream 

driving applications.(51)

FIAT created a concept car called the Mio 

in late 2010, based on ideas submitted 

from members of the general public 

throughout the world. This car, which was 

presented at the 2010 auto show in Torino, 

Italy, included not only fully automated 

driving on a dedicated lane, but also 

inductive recharging of the batteries 

that were used by its electric powertrain, 

representing a very advanced vision for 

future mobility.(52)
11

This CACC system was demonstrated at 

a conference coinciding with the Grand 

Cooperative Driving Challenge in Eindhoven, 

the Netherlands, in May 2011.

Under the SPITS project, Dutch researchers 

have also developed a few cooperative 

systems. These systems rely on partial 

automation and driver assistance to 

encourage transitions toward deployment 

before a fully automated system can be 

implemented and even before CACC can 

achieve large market penetration. These 

systems were tested and demonstrated on 

a stretch of heavily instrumented roadway 

between Eindhoven and Helmond in the 

Netherlands, where a 5 km (3 mi) stretch 

of highway is equipped with 48 video 

cameras and 11 dedicated short-range 

communication transceivers, providing 

continuous surveillance and communication 

with the vehicles.(58) These systems, recently 

named advisory acceleration control (AAC), 

provide the driver with an in-vehicle display 

that continually advises him or her whether 

to accelerate or decelerate, or gives a 

recommended target speed.(59) These 

systems have been implemented in two 

different ways: (a) Using V2V communication 

within the vehicle stream to generate the 

accelerate or decelerate recommendations 

or (b) using I2V communication based on 

data collected from the highly instrumented 

highway segment. The latter approach is 

seen as a way of providing benefits to the 

early adopters on critical highway stretches 

before large portions of the vehicle fleet are 

equipped and has been tested successfully 

with 8 equipped vehicles scattered along a 

string of 68 vehicles.(60)

van Arem, Driel, and Visser used the MIXIC 

microscopic simulation to investigate the 

Some European researchers have also started 

studying the concept of a fully automated 

intersection, in parallel with similar activities 

in the United States. In these studies, there 

would be no traffic signal controller, but the 

vehicles would communicate with each other 

and with the intersection to reserve slots that 

they could track through the intersection 

to avoid conflicts with vehicles crossing at 

right angles.(53) Spanish researchers have 

also studied (in simulation) an intersection 

control strategy that could involve a mixture 

of automated and manually driven vehicles.(54)

Partially Automated Car 

Applications

(Control Assistance) 

Driving assistance is currently more popular 

than automated driving in the automotive 

world, so there is more work in this area. 

There are, of course, commercially available 

products already on the market that provide 

lane–keeping assistance and ACC in high–

end cars in Europe and Japan. The one 

notable study of drivers’ use of ACC that 

was conducted outside of the United States 

was in the Netherlands, and the results can 

be found via reference 55.

Nearly all control assistance systems 

that have been developed and tested 

have been autonomous and are therefore 

outside the scope of this review; however, the 

Technical University of Eindhoven and TNO 

in the Netherlands have started developing 

a cooperative ACC (CACC) system similar 

to what has already been tested by 

the Partners for Advanced Transit and 

Highways (PATH) in the United States.(56,57)
12

traffic throughput and stability impacts of 

CACC, incorporating good vehicle dynamics 

and driver behavior models.(61) They studied 

a freeway lane drop as the disturbance to 

induce a shockwave to limit capacity and 

found that the shockwave effect could be 

mitigated and the average speed increased 

with higher market penetrations of CACC. 

Schakel, van Arem, and Netten used a 

different simulation model to explore the 

traffic flow stability implications of CACC 

and the AAC, which advises the driver when 

to accelerate and decelerate rather than 

doing so automatically.(62) The researchers 

included results of a field experiment that 

used 50 vehicles equipped with the AAC, 

showing reductions in variability of speeds 

and gaps between vehicles.

Driver Guidance

and Cooperative 

Collision Warning 

Applications

Driver guidance and collision warning 

systems are more popular than control 

assistance systems, so there is more work 

on these applications. Although most 

such systems have been autonomous, 

there is growing attention to cooperative 

applications. These have been important 

elements of the three major European 

cooperative system integrated projects, 

CVIS, SAFESPOT, and COOPERS, for the 

past several years and have actually been the 

primary focus of SAFESPOT. Related work 

has also been conducted in the supporting 

projects on the communication-enabling 

technologies, such as COMeSafety and 

the work of the Car2Car Communications 

Consortium. The current generation of 

European research projects was reviewed in 

the “General Overview of Relevant Current 

International Activities” section of this 

literature review, but it is also worth noting 

that field operational tests of a variety of 

cooperative systems are planned within the 

Drive C2X Project (C2X refers to car to car 

or car to infrastructure or car to nomadic 

device). Some of the very complicated 

linkages among the European cooperative 

system projects were explained in a briefing 

by Ertico’s Maxime Flament focused on the 

Drive C2X project.(63)

Most of the documentation of the work 

within the individual projects that is 

reported in the literature is highly technical 

and therefore not appropriate for inclusion 

here; however, a good introduction to the 

general approach to V2V cooperative 

collision warning in Europe is provided via 

reference 64.

The Intersafe-2 project on intersection 

collision avoidance technology has been 

working on both V2V and I2V cooperation 

to exchange information about vehicle 

movements approaching intersections.(65) 

SAFESPOT also addressed V2V cooperation 

for intersection safety.(66)

The national research programs in Europe 

have also started to work on cooperative 

driver assistance systems. The Dutch work 

on “Connected Cruise Control,” which gives 

real-time advice to drivers about their car 

following to reduce shock waves in traffic, 

was already cited earlier in the section, 

“Partially Automated Car Applications 

(Control Assistance)” in this literature 
13

review, because it also includes partial 

driving automation elements. The French 

research programs ARCOS (2002–2004) 

and SARI (2005–2010) produced some 

relevant work on improving traffic safety, 

but their documentation is rarely provided 

in English.

Japan has placed more emphasis on 

cooperative safety systems than has any 

other country and has published many 

papers about their work at the ITS World 

Congresses. Because of the boundaries 

in responsibility among their government 

ministries, there are separate activities 

aimed at highway safety and safety of 

driving on urban streets and arterials. 

The highway–oriented cooperative ITS 

research programs, under the sponsorship 

of the MLIT, were coordinated by the 

public–private partnership organization 

AHSRA until it was disbanded last year. The 

program was transitioned toward a more 

mainstream deployment orientation as 

the Smartway project, under the Highway 

Industry Development Organization. The 

program defines the acronym AHS as 

advanced cruise–assist highway system

rather than automated highway system

in the description of their projects. The 

main concerns on the Japanese highway 

system are congestion associated with 

traffic merging from on–ramps(68,69) and with 

grade changes in rural areas, referred to as 

sags,

(70,71) so these have been primary topics 

for attention in the Smartway/AHS program.

The National Police Agency of Japan 

created the DSSS program to develop 

infrastructure–vehicle cooperative safety 

systems that rely on the infrared beacon 

systems that they have already deployed 

in many arterial locations in Japan. The 

industry partners in this program have 

presented many papers at recent ITS World 

Congresses about their test systems. (See 

references 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 

and 80.) There are four major test sites in 

Japan, each in the home city of a different 

major automotive original equipment 

manufacturer that leads a different project. 

These systems are so tightly integrated 

with the specific technical characteristics 

of their communication system that it is 

difficult to see how transferable many of 

their results will be to other countries.

General Driver–Vehicle 

Interaction Issues

There is some limited international 

literature that addresses the interactions 

between drivers and vehicles in automated 

and partially automated systems. All of this 

literature is from two of the major European 

research projects.

The CityMobil project addressed driver–

vehicle interaction issues by using driving 

simulator experiments, with drivers 

supported by different driving assistance 

systems. The researchers tested 43 drivers 

who used full speed range ACC or a 

combination of lateral and longitudinal 

control to see how this would affect their 

responses to unexpected events.(81) The 

researchers then considered the transitions 

between automated and manual control in 

the simulator when drivers were driving on 

what they termed open eLanes and closed 

eLanes.

(82) The open eLanes would support 
14

varying levels of automated driving in 

coexistence with mixed traffic, whereas 

the closed eLanes would support fully 

automated platoon driving. In a separate 

study, the driver was treated as the third 

element of the cooperative system, in 

parallel with the vehicle and infrastructure, 

and a driving simulator was used to test the 

driver’s ability to regain control of a vehicle 

after being given an alarm to indicate the 

need to intervene.(83) When the driving was 

automated, drivers needed significantly 

more time to respond than when the 

driving was manual.

HAVEit (i.e., Highly Automated Vehicles for 

Intelligent Transport) was the European 

Commission’s flagship project for studying 

human interaction with partially automated 

vehicles, until its completion in June 

2011. In this project, highly automated

meant partially automated but not fully 

automated. This project studied different 

levels of partial automation in driving 

simulation and with full-scale test vehicles 

on test tracks to determine how well drivers 

can remain engaged and alert when their 

vehicles are driven with different types and 

levels of automation.(84,85,86) HAVEit staged 

demonstrations of their test vehicles at their 

final event in June 2011 in Sweden.

Both the CityMobil and HAVEit projects 

have documented their work on human 

factors in reports that are available 

as project deliverables on their Web 

sites,(87,88) and both have made extensive 

direct references to the relevant research 

performed in the United States in the 

1990s under the AHS program. HAVEit 

has gone into greater depth in developing 

and testing designs of driver interfaces 

and operating concepts for partial 

automation, including means for detecting 

driver engagement and insisting that the 

driver remain engaged (looking at the 

traffic scene ahead) in order to maintain 

automatic speed and steering control.
15
16

References
17

References

Introductory—General Concepts

1. Wahl, R., Tørset, T., & Vaa, T. (2007). Large scale introduction of automated transport: 

Which legal and administrative barriers are present? (Paper No. 2101). Paper presented 

at the 2007 ITS World Congress, Beijing, China. 

2. CityMobil. (n.d.). Project deliverable D2.5.1. Retrieved October 11, 2012, from

http://www.citymobil-project.eu/site/en/documenten_deliverables.php

3. Fujimoto, A., et al. (2008, October). Toward realization of Smartway in Japan. Paper 

presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, New York, NY.

4. Hatakoyama, M. (2008, October). Introduction of pilot projects of Driving Safety Support 

System (DSSS). Paper presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, New York, NY.

5. Energy Conservation Technology Development Department. (2009, February). 

Development of energy-saving ITS technologies: Using ITS to cut CO2 emissions in half 

by 2050. New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization: Kanagawa, 

Japan.

6. Njord, J., Peters, J., Freitas, M., Warner, B., Allred, K. C., Bertini, R., et al. (2006). Safety 

applications of Intelligent Transportation Systems in Europe and Japan. Washington, 

DC: Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs.

7. Shladover, S. E., et al. (2007, November). Lane assist systems for bus rapid transit. (Vol. 

I: Technology Assessment; California PATH Program Report UCB-ITS-PRR-2007-21). 

Retrieved on October 11, 2012, from http://www.path.berkeley.edu/PATH/Publications/

PDF/PRR/2007/PRR-2007-21.pdf 

8. Cooperative Vehicle–Infrastructure Systems. (n.d.). CVIS home page.

Retrieved October 11, 2012, from http://www.cvisproject.org/

9. European Commission—Information Society and Media. (n.d.). Co-operative Systems 

for Intelligent Road Safety home page. Retrieved October 11, 2012, from http://www.

coopers-ip.eu/index.php?id=project

10. European Commission—Information Society and Media & EUCAR. (n.d.). SAFESPOT 

Integrated Project home page. Retrieved October 11, 2012, from http://www.safespot-eu.

org/

11. European Commission—Information Society and Media. (n.d.) eCoMove—Cooperative 

Mobility Systems and Services for Energy Efficiency home page. Retrieved October 11, 

2012, from http://www.ecomove-project.eu/
12. Amditis, A., Lytrivis, P., Iurgel, U., Arndt, C., Karaseitanidis, I., Lindl, H., et al. (2010). 

Enhanced perception suitable for active intervention in automotive safety applications—

The interactIVe project. Paper presented at the 17th ITS World Congress Busan, Korea.

13. Li, B. (2007). Research and development in China on cooperative vehicle–infrastructure 

safety systems (Paper No. 3132). Paper presented at the 2007 ITS World Congress, 

Beijing, China.

14. Noordegraaf, D. M. V., Malone, K. M., Katwijk, R. v., & Gerrits, A. (2009, September). 

Accelerating cooperative systems’ development through the grand cooperative 

driving challenge (Paper No. 3552). Paper presented at the 16th ITS World Congress, 

Stockholm, Sweden.

15. High Tech Automotive Systems & TNO. (n.d.). Grand Cooperative Driving Challenge home 

page. Retrieved on October 11, 2012, from http://www.gcdc.net/

16. Ortgiese, M. (2007). AKTIV—A German research initiative in cooperative systems (Paper 

No. 2179). Paper presented at the 2007 ITS World Congress, Beijing, China.

17. Blosseville, J.-M., & Coutel, S. (2007). Moveo-lab: A dedicated test-bed for cooperative 

assistance devices (Paper No. 2070). Paper presented at the 2007 ITS World Congress, 

Beijing, China.

18. Naranjo, J. E., Gonzalez, C., DePedro, T., Garcia, R., Alonso, J., Sotelo, M., et al. (2006). 

Autopia architecture for automatic driving and maneuvering. Proceedings of IEEE 

Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference, ITSC 2006, 1220–1225.

19. Milanes, V., Llorca, D. F., Vinagre, B. M., Gonzalez, C., & Sotelo, M. A. (2010, September). 

Clavileño: Evolution of an autonomous car. 13th International IEEE Annual Conference 

on Intelligent Transportation Systems (pp. 1129–1134). Madeira Island, Portugal.

20. Gehlen, G., Ramme, F., Sories, S., & Jodlauk, G. (2007). Cooperative cars—Using cellular 

communications for co-operative automotive applications (Paper No. 2258). 2007 ITS 

World Congress, Beijing, China. 

21. Uhlemann E., & Nygren, N. (2009, September). Cooperative systems for traffic safety: Will 

existing wireless access technologies meet the communication requirements? (Paper 

No. 3993). 16th ITS World Congress, Stockholm, Sweden.

22. Van der Pas, J. W. G. M., Argiolu R., & Marchau, V. A. J. W. (2007). Expert opinions on the 

future of advanced driver assistance systems (FADAS) (Paper No. 2038). 2007 ITS 

World Congress, Beijing, China.

23. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. (2006). Vienna Convention on 

Road Traffic of 1968 and European Agreement Supplementing the Convention: 2006 

Consolidated Versions. Retrieved October 11, 2012, from https://unp.un.org/Details.

aspx?pid=7280

18
19

Automated Transit

24. Naranjo, J. E., Bouraoui, L., Garcia, R., Parent, M., & Sotelo M. A. (2009, March). 

Interoperable control architecture for cybercars and dual-mode cars. IEEE Transactions 

on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 10(1), 146–154.

25. Parent, M. (2009). Cybercars: New developments and future applications. Paper 

presented at the 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC.

26. van Dijke, J. P. (2009). CityMobil: Advanced transport for the urban environment. 

Paper presented at the 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC.

27. Benmimoun, A., Lowson, M., Marques, A., Giustiniani G., & Parent, M. (2009). 

Demonstration of advanced transport applications in CityMobil project. In 

Transportation Research Record, No. 2110 (pp. 9–17). Washington, DC: Transportation 

Research Board of the National Academies.

28. CityMobil. (n.d.) CityMobil home page. Retrieved October 11, 2012, from http://www.

citymobil-project.eu/index.php

29. Yang, M., Wang, C., Yang, R., & Parent, M. (2006). CyberC3: Cybercar Automated Vehicles 

in China. Paper presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research 

Board , Washington, DC.

30. Zhang, X. F., Yang, Y., Xie, M., Chen H., & Yu, Z. P. (2008). Perception, planning and 

supervisory control of an unmanned vehicle for 2010 World Expo. 2008 IEEE Intelligent 

Vehicles Symposium (pp. 865–870). Eindhoven, the Netherlands. 

31. Xia, T., Yang, M., Yang, R., & Wang, C. (2010, March). CyberC3: A prototype cybernetic 

transportation system for urban applications. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent 

Transportation Systems, 11(1), pp. 142–152.

32. Vis, H., & Bouwman, R. (2008). The Phileas—Integral safety approach for an electronically 

guided vehicle. 2008 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (pp. 416–421). Eindhoven, 

the Netherlands.

33. Voge T., & McDonald, M. (2007). Automated urban transport systems—Deployment 

barriers and path (Paper No. 4183). Paper presented at the 2007 ITS World Congress, 

Beijing, China.

34. Voge, T. (2009, September). Automated urban transport systems: A decade of ECfunded research and development (Paper No. 3683). Paper presented at the 16th ITS 

World Congress, Stockholm, Sweden.
20

35. CityMobil. (n.d.). Web page on project reports on non-technical issues. Web projects 

include the City Application Manual, Deliverable D.2.24b; Certification Procedures for 

Automated Transport Systems, Deliverable D.2.5.2; Guidelines for Safety, Security and 

Privacy: Barriers to Implementation, Deliverable D.2.5.3; Application of the Business 

Case Tool, Deliverable D.2.4.2; Strategic Modelling Results, Deliverable D.2.3.2; Scenarios 

for Automated Road Transport, Deliverable D.2.2.5. Retrieved October 16, 2012, from 

http://www.citymobil-project.eu/site/en/documenten_deliverables.php

Automated Trucking 

36. Lenk, C., Haberstroh, M., & Wille, M. (2011). Interaction of Human, Machine, and 

Environment in Automated Driving Systems. In Transportation Research Record No. 

2243 (pp 138-145). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board of the National 

Academies.

37. Robinson, T., & Chan, E. (2010). Operating platoons on public motorways: An introduction 

to the SARTRE platooning programme. Paper presented at the 2010 ITS World 

Congress, Busan, Korea.

38. Bergenhem, C., Huan, Q., Benmimoun, A., & Robinson, T. (2010). Challenges of platooning 

on public motorways. Paper presented at the 2010 ITS World Congress, Busan, Korea.

39. Larburu, M., Sanchez, J., & Rodriguez, D. J. (2010). Safe road trains for environment: 

Human factors aspects in dual mode transport systems. Paper presented at the 2010 

ITS World Congress, Busan, Korea.

40. European Commission. (n.d.). SARTRE project Web site. 

Retrieved on October 16, 2012, from http://www.sartre-project.eu/en/Sidor/default.aspx

41. Al Alam, A., Gattami, A., & Johansson, K. H. (2010, September). An experimental study on the 

fuel reduction potential of heavy duty vehicle platooning. 13th International IEEE Annual 

Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (pp. 306–311). Madeira Island, Portugal.

42. Diab, H., Grunewald, M. G. C., Ben Makhlouf, I., Abel, D., & Kowaleski, S. (2010, September). 

A testing platform for cooperative vehicle platoon controllers. 13th International IEEE 

Annual Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (pp. 1718–1723). Madeira Island, 

Portugal. 

43. Suzuki, Y., Hori, T., Kitazumi, T., Aoki, K., Fukao, T., & Sugimachi, T. (2010). Development of 

automated platooning system based on heavy duty trucks. Paper presented at the 2010 

ITS World Congress, Busan, Korea.

44. Sun, X., Miwa, T., Yamamoto, T., & Morikawa, T. (2009, September). An integrated 

simulation system study for automated truck lane on intercity expressways (Paper No. 

3269). Paper presented at the 16th ITS World Congress, Stockholm, Sweden.
21

45. Seki, K., & Hamaguchi, M. (2010). Inter-vehicle communication for truck platooning 

(second report): A research in Energy ITS project. Paper presented at the 2010 ITS 

World Congress, Busan, Korea.

46. Sugimachi, T., Fukao, T., Yoshida, J., Hirata, Y., Suzuki, Y., & Aoki, K. (2010). Autonomous 

driving based on LQ path following control and platooning with front and rear 

information. Paper presented at the 2010 ITS World Congress, Busan, Korea.

47. Kato, S., & Tsugawa, S. (2010). Development of human machine interface for platooning 

systems: Fundamental proposal of HMI for risk avoidance. Paper presented at the 2010 

ITS World Congress, Busan, Korea.

Automated Passenger Cars

48. Shida, M., & Nemoto, Y. (2009, September). Development of a small-distance vehicle 

platooning system (Paper No. 3059). Paper presented at the 16th ITS World Congress, 

Stockholm, Sweden.

49. Shida, M., Doi, T., Nemoto, Y., & Tadakuma, K. (2010). A short-distance vehicle platooning 

system (second report): Evaluation of fuel savings by the developed cooperative 

control. International Symposium on Advanced Vehicle Control (AVEC) (pp. 719–723). 

Loughborough, United Kingdom.

50. Toyota Europe. (2009, November 27). Toyota’s vision of future mobility. Retrieved 

October 16, 2012, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXJoZDGYBXY

51. Wisselmann, D., Stenberg, K. -E., & Freymann, R. (2007). Improving drivers’ safety and 

driving pleasure—Next generation ADAS and IVIS (Paper No. 2075). Paper presented at 

the 2007 ITS World Congress, Beijing, China.

52. FIAT Mio. (n.d.) Are we heading towards the extinction of driving? Retrieved on October 

16, 2012, from http://www.fiatmio.cc/en/2009/11/traffic-system-%E2%80%93-are-weheading-toward-the-extinction-of-driving/ (FIAT. [2010, December 1]. A common day in 

Fiat Mio’s future. Retrieved on October 16, 2012, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v

=aCPrg2TQui0&playnext=1&list=PL5FED4D80C03D0EA0)

53. de la Fortelle, A. (2010, September). Analysis of reservation algorithms for cooperative 

planning at intersections. 13th International IEEE Annual Conference on Intelligent 

Transportation Systems (pp. 445–449). Madeira Island, Portugal.

54. HosseinNia, S. H., Tejado, I., Vinagre, B. M., Milanes, V., & Gonzalez, C. (2010, 

September). Controller for urban intersections based on hybrid automaton. 13th 

International IEEE Annual Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (pp. 

261–266). Madeira Island, Portugal.
22

Partially Automated Vehicles (Control Assistance)

55. Viti, F., Hoogendoorn, S. P., Alkim, T. P., & Bootsma, G. (2008). Driving behavior interaction 

with ACC: Results from a field operational test in the Netherlands. 2008 IEEE Intelligent 

Vehicles Symposium (pp. 745–750). Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

56. Naus, G., et al. (2009, September). Towards on-the-road implementation of cooperative 

adaptive cruise control (Paper No. 3330). Paper presented at the 16th ITS World 

Congress, Stockholm, Sweden.

57. Naus, G. J. L., Vugts, R. P. A., Ploeg, J., van de Molengraft, M. G. J., & Steinbuch, M. (2010, 

November). String-stable CACC design and experimental validation, a frequencydomain approach. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 59(9), 4268–4279.

58. van den Broek, T. H. A., Netten, B. D., Hoedemaeker, M., & Ploeg, J. (2010, September). 

The experimental setup of a large field operational test for cooperative driving vehicles 

at the A270. 13th International IEEE Annual Conference on Intelligent Transportation 

Systems (pp. 198–203). Madeira Island, Portugal.

59. van den Broek, T. H. A., Netten, B. D., & Lieverse, P. (2011, May). Results of cooperative 

driving applications of the SPITS project. Proceedings of the Eighth International 

Automotive Congress (pp. 87–93). Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

60. Netten, B. D., van den Broek, T. H. A., & Koenders, E. (2011, May). Shockwave damping—

Field tests on the A270 in 2011. Proceedings of the Eighth International Automotive 

Congress (pp. 173–179). Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

61. van Arem, B., van Driel, C. J. G., & Visser, R. (2006, December). The impact of cooperative 

adaptive cruise control on traffic-flow characteristics. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent 

Transportation Systems, 7(4), 429–436.

62. Schakel, W. J., van Arem, B., & Netten, B. D. (2010, September). Effects of cooperative 

adaptive cruise control on traffic flow stability. 13th International IEEE Annual 

Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (pp. 759–764). Madeira Island, 

Portugal.

Driver Guidance and Cooperative Collision Warning

63. Flament, M. (2011, February). Introduction to the DRIVE C2X integrated project: Overview 

on the project. Slide show presented at the Third ETSI TC ITS Workshop, Venice, Italy. 

Retrieved October 16, 2012, from

http://docbox.etsi.org/Workshop/2011/201102_ITSWORKSHOP/07_

WOULDYOUBEMYVALENTINE/ERTICO_DRIVE_C2X_FLAMENT.pdf
23

64. Mitropoulos, G., Karanasiou, I. S., Hinsberger, A., Aguardo-Agelet, F., Wieker, H., Hilt, H.-J., 

et al. (2010, September). Wireless local danger warning: Cooperative foresighted driving 

using intervehicle communication. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation 

Systems, 11(3), 539–553.

65. Roessler, B., & Fuerstenberg, K. (2010, September). First European STREP on cooperative 

intersection safety, INTERSAFE-2. 13th International IEEE Annual Conference on 

Intelligent Transportation Systems (pp. 422–427). Madeira Island, Portugal.

66. Ibanez-Guzman, J., Lefevre, S., Mokkadem, A., & Rodhaim, S. (2010, September). Vehicleto-vehicle communications applied to road intersection safety field results. 13th 

International IEEE Annual Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (pp. 192–

197). Madeira Island, Portugal.

67. Risto, M., Martens, M., & Wilschut, E. (2010, November). Introduction to the connected 

cruise control and related human factors consideration. Paper presented at the 11th 

TRAIL Congress, The Netherlands Research School for Transport, Infrastructure and 

Logistics, Delft, the Netherlands.

68. Hirasawa, T., & Hatakenaka, H. (2007). AHS safety service utilizing an ITS on-board unit 

for driving support in merging sections (Paper No. 3217). Paper presented at the 2007 

ITS World Congress, Beijing, China.

69. Hatakenaka, H., et al. (2008, October). Development and verification of effectiveness of 

an AHS safe merging support service. Paper presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, 

New York, NY. 

70. Hirasawa, T., & Yamada, K. (2007). AHS for making traffic flow smoother by optimizing 

lane utilization rates at expressway sag sections (Paper No. 3216). 2007 ITS World 

Congress, Beijing, China.

71. Sakai, K., Hatakenaka, H., Asano, M., Nishii, S., & Kinoshita, Y. (2008, October). The 

development of AHS for the service to optimize lane utilization rates at sag sections on 

expressway. Paper presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, New York, NY.

72. Oguri, H., et al. (2007). Effect verification of information provision for vehicle–

infrastructure cooperative system—Result of Aichi DSSS field verification (Paper No. 

3064). Paper presented at the 2007 ITS World Congress, Beijing, China.

73. Fukushima, M., Seto, M., & Tsukada, N. (2007). Progress of V-I Cooperative Safety Support 

System in Kanagawa, Japan (Paper No. 3002). Paper presented at the 2007 ITS World 

Congress, Beijing, China.

74. Fukushima, M., Kawata, K., & Tsukada, M. (2008, October). Progress of vehicle–

infrastructure cooperative safety support system in Kanagawa, Japan. Paper presented 

at the 15th ITS World Congress, New York, NY.
24

75. Yamamoto, M., et al. (2008, October). Development of vehicle–infrastructure cooperative 

systems using infrared beacon and DSRC—Hiroshima DSSS field operational test. Paper 

presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, New York, NY.

76. Ikawa, M. et al. (2008, October). A cooperative driving support system based on ITS onboard unit. Paper presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, New York, NY.

77. Kadoya, T., et al. (2008, October). Development of driving safety support systems for the 

prevention of right-turn collision. Paper presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, New 

York, NY.

78. Ochi, M., et al. (2008, October). Feasibility study on vehicle–infrastructure cooperative 

system for prevention of right-turn accidents. Paper presented at the 15th ITS World 

Congress, New York, NY.

79. Fukushima, M., Kawata, K., & Tsukada, N. (2009, September). Progress of vehicle–

infrastructure cooperative safety support system, DSSS, in Japan (Paper No. 2889). 

Paper presented at the 16th ITS World Congress, Stockholm, Sweden.

80. Iwata, T., et al. (2009, September). Aichi DSSS field evaluation test concerning vehicle 

infrastructure cooperative systems in 2008 (Paper No. 2878). Paper presented at the 

16th ITS World Congress, Stockholm, Sweden.

Driver–Vehicle Interactions

81. Martens, M. H., Wilschut, E., & Pauwelussen, J. (2008, October). Semi-autonomous driving: 

Do drivers still respond to unexpected events? Paper presented at the 15th ITS World 

Congress, New York, NY. 

82. Toffetti, A., Wilschut, E. S., Martens, M. H., Schieben, A., Rambaldini, A., Merat, N., & 

Flemisch, F. (2009). CityMobil: Human factor issues regarding highly automated vehicles 

on eLane. In Transportation Research Record No. 2110 (pp. 1–8). Washington, DC: 

Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.

 83. Merat, N., & Jamson, A. H. (2009). How do drivers behave in a highly automated car. 

Proceedings of the Fifth International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver 

Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design (pp. 514–521). Big Sky, MT.

 84. Hoeger, R., et al. (2008, October). Highly automated vehicles for intelligent transport: 

HAVEit approach. Paper presented at the 15th ITS World Congress, New York, NY.

85. Hoeger, R., et al. (2009, September). Selective automated driving as a pivotal element 

to solve safety and environmental issues in personal mobility (Paper No. 3699). Paper 

presented at the 16th ITS World Congress, Stockholm, Sweden. 
25

86. Rauch, N. et al. (2009, September). The importance of driver state assessment within 

highly automated vehicles (Paper No. 3117). Paper presented at the 16th ITS World 

Congress, Stockholm, Sweden.

87. CityMobil. (2009, August). Human factors aspects in automated and semi-automatic 

transport systems: State of the art. CityMobil project deliverable 3.2.1. Retrieved October 

16, 2012, from http://www.citymobil-project.eu/site/en/documenten_deliverables.php

88. HAVEit. (2009, March). Report on driver assessment methodology. Retrieved October 16, 

2012, from http://haveit-eu.org/LH2Uploads/ItemsContent/24/HAVEIt_212154_D32.1_

public_version.pdf
Office of Operations Research and Development

Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center

6300 Georgetown Pike

McLean, VA 22101-2296

Publication No. FHWA-HRT-13-025

HRTM-30/12-12(WEB)E