Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background: As intelligent systems increasingly operate in high-risk environments, understanding how they perceive and respond to hazards is critical for ensuring safety. Methods: In this study, we conduct a comparative analysis of 60 real-world accident reports, 30 from process control systems (PCSs) and 30 from autonomous vehicles (AVs), to examine differences in risk triggers, perception paradigms, and interaction failures between humans and artificial intelligence (AI). Results: Our findings reveal that PCS risks are predominantly internal to the system and detectable through deterministic, rule-based mechanisms, whereas AVs’ risks are externally driven and managed via probabilistic, multi-modal sensor fusion. More importantly, despite these architectural differences, both domains exhibit recurring human–AI interaction failures, including over-reliance on automation, mode confusion, and delayed intervention. In the case of PCSs, these failures are historically tied to human–automation interaction; this article extrapolates these patterns to anticipate potential human–AI interaction challenges as AI adaptation increases. Conclusions: This study highlights the need for a hybrid risk perception framework and improved human-centered design to enhance situational awareness and responsiveness. While AI has not yet been implemented in PCS incident studies, this work interprets human–automation failures in these cases as indicative of potential challenges in human–AI interaction that may arise in future AI-integrated process systems. Implications extend to developing safer intelligent systems across industrial and transportation sectors.
Wen et al. (Tue,) studied this question.