Most new cars come equipped with some form of partial automation, such as adaptive cruise control (ACC), lane centering and automatic emergency braking (AEB). However, vehicles with partial automation are not self-driving — even though automakers sometimes use names that imply their systems are. The human driver must still handle many routine driving tasks, monitor how well the automation is performing and remain ready to take over if anything goes wrong.

While most partial automation systems have some safeguards in place to help ensure drivers are focused and ready, initial tests conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) show that they’re not robust enough.

The IIHS is introducing a new ratings program to encourage automakers to incorporate more robust safeguards into their partial driving automation systems. Out of the first 14 systems tested, only one earned an acceptable rating. Two are rated marginal, and 11 are rated poor. “Most of them don’t include adequate measures to prevent misuse and keep drivers from losing focus on what’s happening on the road,” said President of the IIHS David Harkey.

Effective driver monitoring is essential to making partial automation safe. Systems should be able to detect if the driver’s head or eyes are not directed at the road or the driver’s hands and whether the driver’s hands are on the steering wheel or ready to grab it if necessary.

The IIHS calls for timely and persistent attention reminders. When a partial automation system detects that the driver’s eyes aren’t directed at the road or the driver’s hands aren’t ready to take over the steering, it should begin a dual-mode alert, such as an audible and visual warning, within 10 seconds. Before the 20-second mark, it should add a third mode of alert or begin an emergency procedure to slow the vehicle.

The IIHS also wants driver monitoring requirements aimed at ensuring drivers stay involved in decision-making. For instance, all lane changes should be initiated or confirmed by the driver. When traffic triggers the Adaptive Cruise Control to bring the vehicle to a complete stop, it should not automatically resume unless the system can confirm the driver is looking at the road and no more than two minutes have passed.

In addition, the lane-centering feature should not switch off automatically when the driver makes manual steering adjustments within the lane, because that can discourage drivers from being physically involved in the driving. Physical involvement can help prevent “mental disengagement.”

There is little evidence that partial automation has any safety benefits, so it’s essential that these systems can only be used when proven safety features are engaged. These include seat belts, AEB and lane departure prevention. For a good rating in this category, a partial automation system should not switch on if the driver is unbelted or AEB or lane departure prevention is not active. If already in operation and the driver unfastens his/her seat belt, the system should immediately begin its multi-mode, driver-disengagement attention reminders. Finally, it must be impossible to switch off AEB or lane departure prevention if the automation is engaged.

It is clear that adequate measures to prevent misuse should be a primary concern for vehicle manufacturers.