ISO/TR 20545:2017
(Main)Intelligent transport systems — Vehicle/roadway warning and control systems — Report on standardisation for vehicle automated driving systems (RoVAS)/Beyond driver assistance systems
Intelligent transport systems — Vehicle/roadway warning and control systems — Report on standardisation for vehicle automated driving systems (RoVAS)/Beyond driver assistance systems
ISO/TR 20545:2017 provides the results of consideration on potential areas and items of standardization for automated driving systems. In this document, automated driving systems are defined as systems that control longitudinal and lateral motions of the vehicle at the same time. Potential standardization areas and items are widely extracted and marshalled in a systematic manner to distinguish potential standardization for various automated vehicle systems. When, what, and by whom the standardization activities are actually done are discussed separately.
Systèmes intelligents de transport — Systèmes d'alerte et de commandes des véhicules/chaussées — Rapport sur la normalisation des systèmes de conduite automatisée des véhicules (RoVAS)/systèmes d'aide à la conduite
General Information
Buy Standard
Standards Content (Sample)
TECHNICAL ISO/TR
REPORT 20545
First edition
2017-07
Intelligent transport systems —
Vehicle/roadway warning and control
systems — Report on standardisation
for vehicle automated driving
systems (RoVAS)/Beyond driver
assistance systems
Systèmes intelligents de transport — Systèmes d’alerte et de
commandes des véhicules/chaussées — Rapport sur la normalisation
des systèmes de conduite automatisée des véhicules (RoVAS)/systèmes
d’aide à la conduite
Reference number
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
©
ISO 2017
---------------------- Page: 1 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT
© ISO 2017, Published in Switzerland
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on the internet or an intranet, without prior
written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below or ISO’s member body in the country of
the requester.
ISO copyright office
Ch. de Blandonnet 8 • CP 401
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva, Switzerland
Tel. +41 22 749 01 11
Fax +41 22 749 09 47
copyright@iso.org
www.iso.org
ii © ISO 2017 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 2 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Extracting potential areas for standardization . 1
4.1 Principles . 1
4.1.1 General. 1
4.1.2 Issues based on architectures . 1
4.1.3 Issues based on activities . 3
4.1.4 Other important issues for automated driving systems . 3
4.2 Proposal of standardization items . 3
4.2.1 Classification . 3
4.2.2 Common items . 4
4.2.3 Basic functional requirements . 4
4.2.4 Other items . 6
5 Approach to standardization . 7
5.1 Standards organizations . 7
5.2 Priority . 7
Annex A (informative) Related activities on standards for automated driving systems .8
Annex B (informative) Mapping and table of potential standardization items .11
Annex C (informative) Example of helpful potential standardized items in 4.2.4 .15
© ISO 2017 – All rights reserved iii
---------------------- Page: 3 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO documents should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www .iso .org/ directives).
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of
patent rights. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. Details of
any patent rights identified during the development of the document will be in the Introduction and/or
on the ISO list of patent declarations received (see www .iso .org/ patents).
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation on the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO’s adherence to the
World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) see the following
URL: w w w . i s o .org/ iso/ foreword .html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 204, Intelligent transport systems.
iv © ISO 2017 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 4 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
Introduction
In recent years, rapid progresses of sensing and computational technologies have promoted research
and development on automated driving systems. Some systems have already been commercialized
and have begun to be installed in production vehicles. Standardization activities for automated
driving systems have been advanced as well. Amid ongoing practical implementation of the systems,
standardization for automated driving systems should be stimulated.
In the future, various automated driving systems will be increasingly introduced in the automotive
industry. For appropriate usage of these systems by general users, it is important for us to make a
distinction between a vehicle’s functions and the driver’s role to avoid confusion. Therefore, several
International Standards should be established that can be shared widely. However, from current
perspective, it seems to be not clear which items should be standardized. Nevertheless, since more
advanced systems for automated driving systems will be introduced in the near future, standardization
will widely consider and assess candidates for standardization to ensure covering not only the functions
of an automated driving system itself, but also contributing or enabling issues for each system.
Therefore, this document outlines potential standardization areas and items and marshal them in a
systematic manner to distinguish potential standardization for various automated vehicle systems.
It is also intended to cover the need for standardization on the usage of automated driving systems
in a heterogeneous traffic condition (where not all vehicles are automated). This document does
neither determine the area of standardization body, where the work should be performed, nor the
recommendation of specific standardization.
Therefore, this document outlines potential standardization areas and items and marshal them in a
systematic manner to distinguish potential standardization for various automated vehicle systems. It
is also intended to cover the need for standardization on the usage of automated driving systems in
a heterogeneous traffic condition (where not all vehicles are automated). This document determines
neither the area of standardization body, where the work should be performed, nor the recommendation
of specific standardization. This document also does not exert any influence on standardization
activities in ISO/TC 204 regardless of past works and present works.
This document should be helpful for those who consider and/or develop standards for automated
driving systems. Use case of this document may be as follows; to share common perceptions of
standardization, to clarify perspectives of standardization, to take standardization items, to estimate
coverages and priorities of items, and to consider feature of technologies or products.
© ISO 2017 – All rights reserved v
---------------------- Page: 5 ----------------------
TECHNICAL REPORT ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
Intelligent transport systems — Vehicle/roadway warning
and control systems — Report on standardisation for
vehicle automated driving systems (RoVAS)/Beyond driver
assistance systems
1 Scope
This document provides the results of consideration on potential areas and items of standardization for
automated driving systems. In this document, automated driving systems are defined as systems that
control longitudinal and lateral motions of the vehicle at the same time.
Potential standardization areas and items are widely extracted and marshalled in a systematic manner
to distinguish potential standardization for various automated vehicle systems. When, what, and by
whom the standardization activities are actually done are discussed separately.
2 Normative references
There are no normative references in this document.
3 Terms and definitions
No terms and definitions are listed in this document.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at http:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at http:// www .electropedia .org/
4 Extracting potential areas for standardization
4.1 Principles
4.1.1 General
This clause presents basic concepts for items related to automated driving systems for standardization.
Examples of basic architectures have been considered and potential areas for standardization, based
on these examples have been derived. Aside from this, items based on actual standardization activities
and other important issues have been extracted.
4.1.2 Issues based on architectures
4.1.2.1 General
It is effective to extract areas for standardization based on architecture. This section suggests an
example of notional architecture based on automated driving systems. This is not a proposal for a
standard, but intended for use when for considering potential standardization items systematically.
It might be suggested that areas for standardization are standards for each entity and interface
between entities. Functional transitions are especially important in the architecture of automated
driving systems.
© ISO 2017 – All rights reserved 1
---------------------- Page: 6 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
4.1.2.2 Functional architecture
An automated driving system as a whole is given as an example of the notional functional architecture
of systems in Figure 1.
Under normal driving, a driver recognizes the driving environment (S1: on) and operates a vehicle (S5:
on). Under automated driving, operation is entrusted to the in-vehicle system (S4: on). Additionally,
the system shows its condition to the driver and he/she may adjust the system as needed (S2: on). The
vehicle may be operated by the driver and the in-vehicle system also (S4: on and S5: on). Under fully
automated driving, there is no need for the driver to be involved in operation. The driver does not need
to recognize the environment (S1: off) nor monitor the in-vehicle systems (S2: off).
Alternatively, there are two types of automated driving modes: the non-connected (autonomous) type
and the connected type. The non-connected type does not communicate with infrastructure and/or
other vehicles (S3: off). The connected type communicates with infrastructure and/or other vehicles
(S3: on). The connected type receives external information from infrastructure and/or other vehicles
and transmits its own information to them also.
Driver
Recognition Decision/Planning
d d
S1
S2 S5
Automated driving system IF2
In-vehicle system
IF1
S4
Recognition Decision/Planning
v v
S3
IF3
IF1’
Recognition Decision/Planning
i/ov i/ov
Infrastructure/Other vehicles
S: switch IF: interface
Figure 1 — Example of notional functional architecture
There might be a need to develop standards for the functional requirements of recognition, decision
and planning, requirements for interfaces between elements, and standards for designing automated
driving systems that can adapt to changes of switch positions. For future introduction, on behalf of
users, of its design for systems that is widely shared, International Standards need to be established.
4.1.2.3 Physical architecture
An example of notional physical architecture is shown in Figure 2. This is not a proposal for a standard,
but intended for use when for considering potential standardization items systematically.
Standards for each entity and interfaces between entities may be subjects of standardization. However,
physical architecture and functions differ depending on the implementation of each system. Therefore,
the specifications of physical elements and their standard are not discussed in this document, although
those might be subject to international standards.
2 © ISO 2017 – All rights reserved
Driving environment
Operation
Vehicle
---------------------- Page: 7 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
Infrastructure
Guiding info.
Operator terminal
Input/output info.
Road traf€ic info. Processing
Information system
Sensing info.
(other transportation)
Communication
(V-I/Wide area)
Vehicle
In vehicle
Driver input
indication/warning
Exterior
Outside sensing
indication/warning
Processing
In vehicle sensing
Recording
On-board data Actuators
Communication
(V-V/V-P/etc.)
Other vehicles/pedestrians
Figure 2 — Example of notional physical architecture
4.1.3 Issues based on activities
In addition, areas for standardization are extracted, considering the activities for standardizing
automated driving systems as described in Annex A.
It is suggested that areas for standardization be definitions of levels of automated driving systems,
terms, and testing issues.
4.1.4 Other important issues for automated driving systems
Several important potential standardization items that are not shown in the architecture are proposed.
For instance, standards might be developed for safety, reliability, security, recording (event data
recorder), principle of privacy, test methods and distinguishing automated driving systems from non-
automated driving systems.
4.2 Proposal of standardization items
4.2.1 Classification
Potential standardization areas and items are extracted in the previous section. In this section,
potential areas of standardizations are classified in three categories: common items, basic functional
requirements and other items.
NOTE Items are mapped and listed in Annex B.
© ISO 2017 – All rights reserved 3
---------------------- Page: 8 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
4.2.2 Common items
a) Terminology
Today, automated driving systems are being discussed in various countries and regions. However, there
is no common International Standard for definitions of terms of automated driving systems. As a result,
different groups use terms in different ways. For instance, one word may have different meanings, or
several words may be used to express the same idea.
To prevent confusion among users and to share a common understanding among stakeholders, terms
for automated driving systems might be potential standardization areas.
For instance, the concept of automated driving systems might be a potential standardization item
because it has a wide range of meanings.
b) Levels of automation
As shown in A.6, several institutions, including SAE, NHTSA and BASt, define automation levels.
However, their definitions differ in terms of descriptions and criteria.
There is a need to standardize automation levels to prevent misunderstandings among users and to
have a shared understanding among stakeholders.
The name of each level, which is easy to understand, and description of each level including examples of
use, are needed.
The definitions of automation levels in A.6 are based on the following elements:
— the subject of control by systems;
— division of authority between driver and systems [driver’s presence, response to faults and failures
(override, etc.) transition time, driver’s position, monitoring environment, monitoring systems,
control operations, start/stop];
— operating environment (time, place, weather, road conditions, road structures, traffic conditions,
speed, etc.).
c) Automated driving system reference architecture
There are many systems that can be used for automated driving systems. Having a common
understanding of systems might be a potential standardization area. To define reference architecture
would be useful to discuss and consider functions for automated driving systems.
For example, the communication protocol field has reference architectures such as the OSI model to
promote a common understanding by everyone. It is a layered model of communication functions,
which provides a common understanding when discussing communication protocols and systems.
4.2.3 Basic functional requirements
a) System requirements of each automation level
Requirements for automated driving systems at each automation level may include recognition, decision
and planning of automated driving system’s area and requirements of on/off switching conditions of S1,
S2 and S3, which are connections of interfaces under the notional functional architecture in Figure 1.
For instance, standardizing recognition of driving status (positioning, static or dynamic condition
of status such as maps and traffic jam information), sensing targets and area, control performance
(responsive and control area), checks of status and information to driver might be considered.
b) Functional allocation between system and driver at each automation level
4 © ISO 2017 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 9 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
Requirements for functional allocation between system and driver at each automation level may
be considered. They relate interface IF2 between driver and in-vehicle system under the notional
functional architecture in Figure 1.
For instance, standardization of requirements for monitoring/estimating driving state and system
operation, requirements for driver to recover driving might be considered.
c) Requirements regarding transition of functions between system and driver at each automation level
Requirements regarding transition of functions between system and driver of each automation level
may be considered. They include transition of on/off switching condition of S1, S2, S4 and S5, and
interface IF2 under the notional functional architecture in Figure 1.
For instance, for standardizing information provided by a system, time requirements for control
change, interaction with driver, and HMI might be considered.
d) Requirements regarding system transition between automation levels
Requirements regarding system transition between levels may be considered. They include transition
of on/off switching conditions of S1, S2, S4 and S5, and interface IF2 under the notional functional
architecture in Figure 1.
For instance, for standardizing information provided by a system, time requirements for control
change, interaction with driver, and HMI might be considered.
e) Requirements in case of system malfunction at each automation level
Requirements of system operation in case of system malfunctions (recognition and decision/planning)
at each level may be considered.
They include interface IF2 between driver and in-vehicle system on/off switching conditions of S1 and
S2, on/off switching and transition conditions of S4 and S5 under the notional functional architecture
in Figure 1.
For instance, standardizing requirements for system operation (processing principle in case of system
malfunctions at each automation level) might be considered.
f) Elements of V2X communication requirements under cooperative systems
Requirements for a driver under cooperative systems may include interface IF3 between in-vehicle
system and infrastructure/other vehicles if S3 is “on”, then a vehicle cooperates with infrastructure or
other vehicles under the notional functional architecture Figure 1. V2X communication is required for
automated parking known as “Automated valet parking system”, which does not need a vehicle to be
driven by a human driver but may offer operating and monitoring from outside the vehicle.
For instance, standardization of requirements for message sets, data (contents, accuracy, etc.), latency,
capacity, V2X communication range and security if a vehicle communicates with infrastructure or other
vehicles might be considered.
g) Basic concepts regarding using combinations of information from in-vehicle sensors and V2X
communications
Requirements for external information from infrastructure or other vehicles obtained from cooperative
systems should be considered. A vehicle cooperates with infrastructure or other vehicles under the
notional functional architecture in Figure 1, when S3 is “on”.
In case there are inconsistencies between the information received from in-vehicle sensors and V2X
communications, data fusion approaches should be considered, weighing the different information
based on the level of confidence in the accuracy of each. Basic concepts or requirements on these issues
may be considered for standardization.
© ISO 2017 – All rights reserved 5
---------------------- Page: 10 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
For instance, discrimination information to identify origin and/or characteristics (e.g. in cases of
information that are given from different source are inconsistent) might be considered.
4.2.4 Other items
This clause intends to cover potential standardization items broadly. The advisability and availability
of standardizations will be discussed and estimated from now on.
a) Reliability requirements
Requirements for reliability of automated driving systems may be considered for standardization.
For instance, there is a need to consider standardization of the following items:
— fault tolerance (capability that enables the system to continue normal operation if part of the
systems fails);
— fail-safe (capability that makes the system emphasize safety to minimize harm if part of the
system fails);
— fool proof (capability designed to ensure no harm results even if users operate it in the wrong way).
These items need to be considered in engineering automated driving systems. However, international
standardization may be difficult due to differences in situation in various countries.
b) Security requirements
Security requirements may be considered for standardization.
For example, data security, cyber security requirements, requirements for preventing manipulation of
sensors might be potential standardization items.
c) Requirements for event data recorder
Requirements for recording data in the operation of systems may be considered for standardization.
For example, there is a need to consider standardization of an event data recorder (When, what and
how to record data) and principle of privacy handling (identifying personal information by tracking
data, personal information dispersed by network).
d) Testing procedures
Requirements related to testing basic functional requirements, reliability, security, and recording
system operation should be considered for standardization.
For instance, there may be a need to standardize for functional tests (test scenarios, etc.), safety
analysis, hazard analysis, safety and reliability tests (test scenarios, test conditions, test use cases) and
test methods (driving simulators, test tracks, desk check, emulation and condition of their combination).
e) Requirements for standard related certification
Requirements for permissions of automated driving systems may be considered for standardization.
For instance, there may be a need to standardize certification-related issue of systems (vehicles, on-
board equipment and roadside equipment), testing method, system diagnostics (checklists before
driving, etc.) and permission to operate automated driving systems on highways.
These items and related issues need to be considered in engineering automated driving systems.
However, international standardization may be difficult due to differences in situation and rules in
various countries.
f) Visible interfaces with other vehicles and pedestrians
6 © ISO 2017 – All rights reserved
---------------------- Page: 11 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
The behaviour of automated driving systems may differ from that of vehicles driven by humans.
Therefore, visible interfaces with other vehicles and pedestrians may be considered for standardization.
For instance, requirements for display of under automated driving, display of under platooning and
interfaces that replace eye contact with other drivers and pedestrians may be considered.
NOTE Examples of analogous items are shown in Annex C.
5 Approach to standardization
5.1 Standards organizations
These are the standards development organizations related to automated driving systems:
— ETSI;
— SAE.
Discussions will be needed on the division of work by these organizations and cooperative work on
standardization.
ISO/TC 204 will actively work on standardization activities for automated driving systems.
On the other hand, standardization of automated driving systems might be closely related to standards
already developed or in the process of being developed. There may be a need to refer to their standards
or to add automated driving system-related subjects in the next revision.
5.2 Priority
Priority should be considered for promoting standardization work focusing on the following viewpoints.
— Give priority to common and generic items, such as definitions of terms and automation levels.
— Give priority to items that will be introduced early.
The standards for each system should be prepared for individual situations. In addition, more
investigation and discussions are needed for considering standardization for each entity and interfaces.
© ISO 2017 – All rights reserved 7
---------------------- Page: 12 ----------------------
ISO/TR 20545:2017(E)
Annex A
(informative)
Related activities on standards for automated driving systems
A.1 General
This Annex provides an overview of activities related to the standardization of automated driving
systems.
Various organizations in different countries and areas have started working on standardization
activities. Standards and regulations based on standardization are also being discussed. As a result,
International Standards for development need to be immediately established.
There are many examples of rules or regulations being established based on standards. For instance,
some rules and regulations were established based on Lane Departure Warning Systems (see ISO 17361)
and Lane Keeping Assist Systems (see ISO 11270).
To define automated driving systems, related issues are discussed in not only standard development
organizations but other organizations or projects. Some examples of activities considering the levels of
automated driving are shown in A.6.
A.2 Activities in North America
In North America, there are activities for standardizing automated driving systems and some rules and
regulations are under consideration.
For instance, these are the following activities.
a) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) defined automation levels. The NHTSA
considers it premature at this time to estab
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.