These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

235 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31381437)

  • 1. A framework for definition of logical scenarios for safety assurance of automated driving.
    Weber H; Bock J; Klimke J; Roesener C; Hiller J; Krajewski R; Zlocki A; Eckstein L
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2019; 20(sup1):S65-S70. PubMed ID: 31381437
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Safety evaluation method in multi-logical scenarios for automated vehicles based on naturalistic driving trajectory.
    Zhang P; Zhu B; Zhao J; Fan T; Sun Y
    Accid Anal Prev; 2023 Feb; 180():106926. PubMed ID: 36543079
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Development of a Framework for Generating Driving Safety Assessment Scenarios for Automated Vehicles.
    Ko W; Park S; Yun J; Park S; Yun I
    Sensors (Basel); 2022 Aug; 22(16):. PubMed ID: 36015798
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Autonomous driving testing scenario generation based on in-depth vehicle-to-powered two-wheeler crash data in China.
    Wang X; Peng Y; Xu T; Xu Q; Wu X; Xiang G; Yi S; Wang H
    Accid Anal Prev; 2022 Oct; 176():106812. PubMed ID: 36054982
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Is vehicle automation enough to prevent crashes? Role of traffic operations in automated driving environments for traffic safety.
    Jeong E; Oh C; Lee S
    Accid Anal Prev; 2017 Jul; 104():115-124. PubMed ID: 28499140
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. An integrated architecture for intelligence evaluation of automated vehicles.
    Huang H; Zheng X; Yang Y; Liu J; Liu W; Wang J
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Sep; 145():105681. PubMed ID: 32712190
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Multi-agent traffic simulations to estimate the impact of automated technologies on safety.
    Kitajima S; Shimono K; Tajima J; Antona-Makoshi J; Uchida N
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2019; 20(sup1):S58-S64. PubMed ID: 31381431
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Safety assessment of automated vehicles: how to determine whether we have collected enough field data?
    de Gelder E; Paardekooper JP; Op den Camp O; De Schutter B
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2019; 20(sup1):S162-S170. PubMed ID: 31381446
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Improvement of driver active interventions during automated driving by displaying trajectory pointers-A driving simulator study.
    Ono S; Sasaki H; Kumon H; Fuwamoto Y; Kondo S; Narumi T; Tanikawa T; Hirose M
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2019; 20(sup1):S152-S156. PubMed ID: 31381449
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Practice makes better - Learning effects of driving with a multi-stage collision warning.
    Winkler S; Kazazi J; Vollrath M
    Accid Anal Prev; 2018 Aug; 117():398-409. PubMed ID: 29477461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Driver models for the definition of safety requirements of automated vehicles in international regulations. Application to motorway driving conditions.
    Mattas K; Albano G; Donà R; Galassi MC; Suarez-Bertoa R; Vass S; Ciuffo B
    Accid Anal Prev; 2022 Sep; 174():106743. PubMed ID: 35700684
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Taking Over Control From Highly Automated Vehicles in Complex Traffic Situations: The Role of Traffic Density.
    Gold C; Körber M; Lechner D; Bengler K
    Hum Factors; 2016 Jun; 58(4):642-52. PubMed ID: 26984515
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Safety assessment of highly automated driving systems in test tracks: A new framework.
    Feng S; Feng Y; Yan X; Shen S; Xu S; Liu HX
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Sep; 144():105664. PubMed ID: 32659494
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. How certain are we that our automated driving system is safe?
    de Gelder E; Op den Camp O
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2023; 24(sup1):S131-S140. PubMed ID: 37267005
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Mining and comparative analysis of typical pre-crash scenarios from IGLAD.
    Hu W; Xu X; Zhou Z; Liu Y; Wang Y; Xiao L; Qian X
    Accid Anal Prev; 2020 Sep; 145():105699. PubMed ID: 32771693
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Development of freeway-based test scenarios for applying new car assessment program to automated vehicles.
    Ko W; Park S; Park S; Jeong H; Yun I
    PLoS One; 2022; 17(7):e0271532. PubMed ID: 35862304
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Law compliance decision making for autonomous vehicles on highways.
    Ma X; Song L; Zhao C; Wu S; Yu W; Wang W; Yang L; Wang H
    Accid Anal Prev; 2024 Sep; 204():107620. PubMed ID: 38823082
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Review on Functional Testing Scenario Library Generation for Connected and Automated Vehicles.
    Zhu Y; Wang J; Meng F; Liu T
    Sensors (Basel); 2022 Oct; 22(20):. PubMed ID: 36298087
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Influence of the feedback links of connected and automated vehicle on rear-end collision risks with vehicle-to-vehicle communication.
    Qin Y; Wang H
    Traffic Inj Prev; 2019; 20(1):79-83. PubMed ID: 30715915
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Critical voxel learning with vision transformer and derivation of logical AV safety assessment scenarios.
    Kang M; Seo J; Hwang K; Yoon Y
    Accid Anal Prev; 2024 Feb; 195():107422. PubMed ID: 38064940
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.