## 1 Introduction
A FOV of 35\({}^{\circ}\) was estimated to be required to detect and react to the majority of crash scenarios. [PERSON] et al. [10] analyzed an empirical study of the braking performance of AEB-P. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has performed tests on eleven such vehicles; these data are publicly available and were analyzed for this study. This study's first objective was to compare forward collision warning (FCW) engagement distance to a target, AEB-P brake application time, and incidences of impact across different manufacturers. The second objective was to analyze the brake application characteristics of AEB-P and how it varies across the different vehicles tested. [PERSON] et al. [11] conducted a study on the test evaluation method of AEB (vehicle to pedestrian), Considering the road environment in Korean and The European New Car Assessment Program (Euro NCAP) Test Protocol V3.0.1. In Euro NCAP, the AEB vulnerable road user (VRU) test protocol V3.0.2 was established. This paper analyzes the scenario of Euro NCAP VRU test protocol V3.0.1, which will be established in 2020, and proposes test conditions according to the Korean road traffic law. In addition, the reliability of the proposed scenario and test conditions were verified by comparing and analyzing the proposed theoretical evaluation formulas and actual test results. In addition, [PERSON] et al. [12] studied the real life safety benefits of increasing brake deceleration in car-to-pedestrian accidents using a simulation of vacuum emergency braking (VEB). The objective of this study was to predict the real-life benefits, namely the number of injuries avoided rather than the reduction in impact speed, offered by a vacuum emergency brake added to an AEB-P system. [PERSON] et al. [13] studied drivers' comfort boundaries in pedestrian crossings in a study on driver braking characteristics as a function of pedestrian walking speed. In this study, driver discomfort can be inferred from brake onset, which refers to the start of brake pedal depression, as the most intuitive way for a driver to resolve a conflicting situation. Using the Euro NCAP AEB VRU test protocol v3.0.2. [14] to support the driver in avoiding when possible or mitigating such crashes, car manufacturers offer avoidance technology that reacts to the situation by autonomous braking and at higher speeds may issue warnings to alert the driver. Systems that specifically look for and react to vulnerable road users like pedestrians and cyclists are called AEB VRU systems. This protocol specifies the AEB VRU test procedure for both AEB pedestrians and AEB cyclists, which are part of the vulnerable road user protection scheme. [PERSON] et al. [15] analysed pedestrian-to-ground impact injury risks in vehicle-to-pedestrian collisions based on rotation angles. Due to the diversity of pedestrian-to-ground impact (secondary impact) mechanisms, secondary impacts always result in more unpredictable injuries as compared to initial vehicle-to-pedestrian collisions (primary impact). This study investigates the effects of frontal vehicle structure, vehicle impact velocity, and pedestrian size and gait on pedestrian-to-ground impact injury risk. [PERSON] et al. [16] studied relative velocity measurements using a low cost single camera-based stereo vision system. This article presents a novel low cost, low-resolution stereo vision system based on a single camera, which may be used to measure the position and relative velocity of a moving object. This new system is very simple in design, low cost, and capable of measuring the depth and relative velocity with desirable accuracy. [PERSON] et al. [17] studies a framework for estimating the distance and dimension attributes of pedestrians in real-time environments using a monocular camera. This work describes a method that uses simple mathematical estimations to automatically discover the distance and dimensions (height and width) of a moving pedestrian lying at distant locations from the camera.