|
| Author(s) (year) | Type | Location | Methods | Key findings |
|
| Villagra et al. (2012) | Journal | Europe | Simulation and testing (vehicle on a test track) | (i) A planning algorithm was proposed and resulted in smooth driving in terms of comfort and efficiency |
| (ii) This was compared to manual driving on a test track and the results were reasonable |
|
| Lam & Katupitiya (2013) | Conference proceeding | Europe | Simulation (using a nonlinear dynamic model and a path-following and car-following model for platooning) | (i) The proposed model of platooning is well-behaved with acceptable error interaction in a complex vehicle-road system |
|
| Lam et al. (2016) | Journal | Australia | Simulation (employing AV in public transportation network) | (i) A reliable representation of the real system utilizing autonomous buses and covering various technologies such as schedule-free dispatch or autonomous intersection management illustrates the performance of the transit network |
|
| Lutin & Kornhauser (2014) | Conference proceeding (TRB) | United States | Case study (cost and benefit analysis and capacity analysis for one transit agency) | (i) The implementation of collision avoidance technology on buses can be cost effective |
| (ii) Cooperative adaptive cruise control (CACC) can increase the capacity of an exclusive bus lane |
| (iii) Collision avoidance and CACC are promising technologies |
|
| Lutin et al. (2016) | Conference proceeding (TRB) | United States | Safety analysis and export opinion with road map | (i) Safety analysis showed the number of bus-related injuries, casualties, and liability expenses is currently increasing |
| (ii) The proposed road map calls for partnerships between stakeholders |
| (iii) The authors call for more research on technologies such as autonomous collision avoidance and autonomous emergency braking |
|
| Polzin (2016) | White paper | United States | Position paper/expert opinion | (i) Autonomous buses could enable increased performance in terms of vehicle speed and passenger volumes (like bus rapid transit) |
| (ii) Automation technology could significantly change travel time and monetary costs |
|
| Pessaro (2016) | Report | United States and Europeā | Case studies (five demonstration projects) | (i) Three of five case studies are European, and they are at the forefront of testing autonomous buses in real-world situations |
| (ii) Two of five case studies are in the United States but are still in the planning stages (pre-deployment) |
| (iii) Europeans are leaders (compared to Americans) in manufacturing and deploying autonomous bus technology |
|
| Sinner & Weidmann (2017) | Conference proceeding | Europe | Definition/concept paper (comparison of automated bus and train system) | (i) When considering automation in the future, the line capacities of bus and train systems are similar |
| (ii) Future train systems likely have greater station capacity due to longer vehicle lengths, but they require higher infrastructure cost |
|
| Sinner et al. (2017) | Conference proceeding (TRB) | Europe | Definition/concept paper (definitions of bus and train in age of automation) | (i) With automation, transit vehicles are not steered by humans any more |
| (ii) The key element defining future buses is compatibility with ordinary road traffic (mixed traffic) without needing mechanical guidance |
|
| Ginn et al. (2017) | Journal | United States | Design/prototype (slim semiautonomous bus rapid transit concept) | (i) The advantages of the proposed bus rapid transit system are decreased operational costs due to narrower bus body sizes and modularity of the vehicles |
| (ii) The disadvantage of the proposed system is that the implementation cost could be high |
|
| Montes et al. (2017) | Journal | Europe | Design/experiment (of automatic control for articulated buses) | (i) The experimental testing of three separate control systems (velocity, steering, and safety) yielded good results |
|
| Gao et al. (2018) | Conference proceeding (TRB) | United States | Simulation (data-driven CACC algorithm) | (i) The proposed algorithm has the capability to increase transit vehicle throughput |
| (ii) The method has better performance in theory and practice than previous control methods |
|
