日前，据央视新闻报道，中国汽车工程研究院发布《组合驾驶辅助技术发展报告》，其中指出，通过对 40余款热门车型的专项测试，覆盖高速路、城市道路等多种交通场景，测试结果表明我国组合驾驶辅助 技术整体水平得到显著提升，已能应对大部分行驶场景，技术水平在国际领先。报告还提到，2025年1 至7月，我国具备组合驾驶辅助系统的乘用车市场渗透率达62.58%。（中国汽车报） ...

中国汽车工程研究院董事长 周玉林：我们将持续制定完善行业标准，同时开展非标目标物识别、边缘场景应对等专项攻关，为企业精准分析技术优势与缺 陷，也帮助消费者清晰理解系统功能边界，合理使用相关功能，实实在在推动产业安全健康发展。 中国汽车工程研究院智能驾驶与主动安全测评专家 李林：例如在环岛汇入汇出等城市典型场景中，车辆在遵守交规、危险识别响应及通行平顺性上提升很 大；在雨天、目标物遮挡等多环境变化时也基本能快速响应。可以说当前我国组合驾驶辅助系统已能应对大部分行驶场景，技术水平已在国际领先。 2025年1至7月，我国具备组合驾驶辅助系统的乘用车市场渗透率达62.58%。专家表示，组合驾驶辅助系统搭载上车是汽车产业发展必然趋势，技术发展与 市场渗透的显著提升，未来行业发展需要补齐短板。 中国汽车工程研究院昨天发布《组合驾驶辅助技术发展报告》，从技术、政策导向及实测验证数据等多个维度进行分析，我国组合驾驶辅助技术水平显著提 升。 中国汽车工程研究院对40余款热门车型开展了组合驾驶辅助专项测试，测试场景涵盖高速路前车消失、强行加塞、动物横穿等20多个交通场景，以及城市道 路环岛汇入汇出、多行人横穿、两轮车切入等30多 ...

Core Viewpoint - Recent court cases regarding drunk driving highlight the importance of driver responsibility and the limitations of technology in circumventing legal obligations [1][4]. Group 1: Legal Implications - The Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court upheld a sentence of three months' detention and a fine of 6,000 yuan for a defendant who claimed to use automatic driving features while driving under the influence [1]. - A case in Hangzhou involved a defendant who used a so-called "smart driving device" while sleeping in the passenger seat, resulting in a conviction for dangerous driving [1]. - These cases collectively send a clear message that technological advancements cannot override legal responsibilities, emphasizing the rigidity of judicial rulings in the context of "smart driving" applications [1][4]. Group 2: Consumer Awareness and Misuse - There is a growing concern about consumers misinterpreting driver assistance technologies as substitutes for human drivers, leading to dangerous behaviors such as modifying vehicles to bypass safety systems [2][3]. - The proliferation of aftermarket "smart driving devices" has created a gray market, complicating regulatory efforts due to their ambiguous legal status [2][3]. - Public awareness campaigns are needed to clarify that driver assistance systems are meant to assist, not replace, human control, urging consumers to remain vigilant while using these technologies [3]. Group 3: Regulatory Recommendations - The government and industry organizations should collaborate to promote awareness that "driver assistance is not autonomous driving," using real case studies to illustrate legal boundaries [3]. - There is a call for regulatory bodies to address the oversight gaps in the aftermarket sector, ensuring that companies producing non-compliant devices are held accountable [4]. - Future legal frameworks should clearly delineate responsibilities associated with different levels of driving assistance and consider incorporating these regulations into driver licensing processes [3][4].