Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization01:12

Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization

7.6K
Error is the deviation of the obtained result from the true, expected value or the estimated central value. Errors are expressed in absolute or relative terms.
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...
7.6K
Errors in Global Positioning System01:26

Errors in Global Positioning System

217
Global Positioning System (GPS) technology has revolutionized navigation and positioning, but its accuracy is often compromised by various errors. These errors, stemming from environmental, satellite, and receiver-related factors, require careful mitigation to ensure reliable performance across applications.Atmospheric ErrorsGPS signals travel through the Earth’s ionosphere and troposphere, introducing delays which affect accuracy. The ionosphere is strongly influenced by charged particles,...
217
Errors and Mistakes in Surveying01:19

Errors and Mistakes in Surveying

404
Errors and mistakes in surveying refer to inaccuracies in measurements and data recording. The errors are deviations from the actual value caused by human sensory limitations, equipment flaws, or environmental effects. These errors are typically unintentional and can result from the inherent imperfections in the instruments used, atmospheric conditions, or the observer’s inability to perceive exact measurements. On the other hand, mistakes are caused by the surveyor's lack of...
404
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

6.8K
In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
6.8K
Stereotype Content Model02:16

Stereotype Content Model

15.1K
The Stereotype Content Model (SCM) was first proposed by Susan Fiske and her colleagues (Fiske, Cuddy, Glick & Xu, 2002; see also Fiske, 2012 and Fiske, 2017). The SCM specifies that when someone encounters a new group, they will stereotype them based on two metrics: warmth—or that group’s perceived intent, and how likely they are to provide help or inflict harm—and competence—or their ability to carry out that objective. Depending on the warmth-competence...
15.1K
Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors01:17

Common Leveling Mistakes and Errors

220
A survey team is tasked with determining the elevation difference between points Point A and Point B, separated by uneven terrain. They use a leveling instrument and a leveling rod.Common MistakesMisreading the Rod: During a backsight reading at Point A, the instrumentman observes the rod partially obscured by tall grass. Instead of reading 1.135 m, they mistakenly record 1.735 m due to the misalignment of the crosshair with the wrong graduation. This error adds 0.600 m to all subsequent...
220

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Evaluation of Arizona's statewide handheld cellphone ban using roadside observation and telematics data.

Journal of safety research·2026
Same author

Decision support for partial automation: Driver behavior and trust with different versions of automated lane change.

Journal of safety research·2026
Same author

Behavior change associated with using partial automation among three samples of drivers during a 4-week field trial.

Journal of safety research·2025
Same author

Applying the Health Belief Model to mobile device distracted driving.

Journal of safety research·2025
Same author

The maximum potential benefits of safety systems on light van crashes in the United States.

Journal of safety research·2025
Same author

Convenience or safety system? Crash rates of vehicles equipped with partial driving automation.

Traffic injury prevention·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 25, 2025

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research
07:15

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research

Published on: December 18, 2020

4.8K

What humanlike errors do autonomous vehicles need to avoid to maximize safety?

Alexandra S Mueller1, Jessica B Cicchino1, David S Zuby1

  • 1Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, United States.

Journal of Safety Research
|December 18, 2020
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Autonomous vehicles (AVs) could prevent 67% of crashes, but human-like errors in decision-making and control could lead to persistent accidents. AVs must prioritize safety over occupant preferences to realize their full potential.

Keywords:
AutonomousCrashesDesignGuidanceRecommendationsSelf-driving

More Related Videos

Operation of the Collaborative Composite Manufacturing CCM System
10:09

Operation of the Collaborative Composite Manufacturing CCM System

Published on: October 1, 2019

6.9K
The Modular Design and Production of an Intelligent Robot Based on a Closed-Loop Control Strategy
11:53

The Modular Design and Production of an Intelligent Robot Based on a Closed-Loop Control Strategy

Published on: October 14, 2017

12.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 25, 2025

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research
07:15

Tactile Vibrating Toolkit and Driving Simulation Platform for Driving-Related Research

Published on: December 18, 2020

4.8K
Operation of the Collaborative Composite Manufacturing CCM System
10:09

Operation of the Collaborative Composite Manufacturing CCM System

Published on: October 1, 2019

6.9K
The Modular Design and Production of an Intelligent Robot Based on a Closed-Loop Control Strategy
11:53

The Modular Design and Production of an Intelligent Robot Based on a Closed-Loop Control Strategy

Published on: October 14, 2017

12.0K

Area of Science:

  • Traffic Safety
  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Autonomous Systems

Background:

  • Driver error is the primary cause of 94% of traffic crashes.
  • Autonomous vehicles (AVs) are expected to reduce crashes but may still err like human drivers.
  • Understanding crash contributing factors is crucial for AV safety development.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze crash data and identify factors that autonomous vehicles (AVs) must address to maximize safety.
  • To determine the potential crash reduction achievable by AVs, considering human-like error patterns.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey (NMVCCS) database.
  • Categorized driver-related crash factors into sensing/perceiving, predicting, planning/deciding, execution/performance, and incapacitation.
  • Modeled crash persistence assuming AVs overcome incapacitation and perception limitations.

Main Results:

  • 33% of crashes involved only perception or incapacitation factors, potentially preventable by AVs.
  • 67% of crashes could persist, with significant contributions from planning/deciding (41%), execution/performance (23%), and predicting (17%) factors.
  • Planning/deciding errors frequently involved speeding and illegal maneuvers.

Conclusions:

  • AVs must avoid replicating human errors in decision-making, prediction, and control to achieve safety goals.
  • AV design must prioritize safety over occupant preferences, especially concerning traffic law adherence.
  • Addressing planning/deciding factors is critical for AVs to realize their crash elimination potential.