Multimodal warning design for take-over request in conditionally automated driving
Tóm tắt
Humans are required to respond to a vehicle’s request to take-over anytime even when they are not responsible for monitoring driving environments in automated driving, e.g., a SAE level-3 vehicle. Thus, a safe and effective delivery of a take-over request from an automated vehicle to a human is critical for the successful commercialization of automated vehicles. In the current study, a set of human-in-the-loop experiments was conducted to compare diverse warning combinations by applying visual, auditory, and haptic modalities under systematically classified take-over request scenarios in conditionally automated driving. Forty-one volunteers consisting of 16 females and 25 males participated in the study. Vehicle and human data on response to take-over request were collected in two take-over scenarios, i.e., a disabled vehicle on the road ahead and a highway exit. Visual-auditory-haptic modal combination showed the best performance in both human behavioral and physiological data and visual-auditory warning in vehicle data. Visual-auditory-haptic warning combination showed the best performance when considering all performance indices. Meanwhile, visual-only warning, which is considered as a basic modality in manual driving, performed the worst in the conditionally automated driving situation. These findings imply that the warning design in automated vehicles must be clearly differentiated from that of conventional manual driving vehicles. Future work shall include a follow-up experiment to verify the study results and compare more diverse multimodal combinations.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF). (2018a). Take-over time comparison by demographics, behavior, and warning strength, 18th congress, 9th session. https://wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/58524064/ACSF-18-09%20-%20%28ROK%29%20Take-over%20time%20comparison_f.pdf?api=v2. Accessed 11 Feb 2020.
Automatically Commanded Steering Function (ACSF). (2018b). Proposal: Driver availability recognition system and transition demand, 18th congress, 3th session https://wiki.unece.org/download/attachments/58524064/ACSF-18-03%20-%20%28Japan%29%20proposal_Driver%20availability%20recognition%20system%20and%20Transition%20demand.pdf?api=v2. Accessed 11 Feb 2020.
AV Simulation (2019). https://www.avsimulation.com Accessed 20 Feb 2007.
Bazilinskyy, P., & De Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Auditory interfaces in automated driving: An international survey. PeerJ Computer Science, 1, e13. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.13.
Bazilinskyy, P., Eriksson, A., Petermeijer, S. M., & De Winter, J. C. F. (2017). Usefulness and satisfaction of take-over requests for highly automated driving. The Hague: Road Safety & Simulation International Conference (RSS 2017) October 17–19, 2017.
Bazilinskyy, P., Petermeijer, S. M., Petrovych, V., Dodou, D., & De Winter, J. C. F. (2018). Take-over requests in highly automated driving: A crowdsourcing survey on auditory, vibrotactile, and visual displays. Transport Res F: Traffic Psychol Behav, 56, 82–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2018.04.001.
Borojeni, S. S., Chuang, L., Heuten, W., & Boll, S. (2016). Assisting drivers with ambient take-over requests in highly automated driving (pp. 237–244). Ann ArborOctober 24-26, 2016: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications. https://doi.org/10.1145/3003715.3005409.
Campbell, J. L., Richard, C. M., Brown, J. L., & McCallum, M. (2007). Crash warning system interfaces: Human factors insights and lessons learned. DOT HS, 810, 697 https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9fb5/f17c244e8ca2ebc961c184944565de1a6ad0.pdf.
ERTRAC. (2017). Automated driving roadmap. Brussels: https://www.ertrac.org/uploads/documentsearch/id38/ERTRAC_Automated-Driving-2015.pdf. Accessed 11 Feb 2020.
Fitch, G. M., Hankey, J. M., Kleiner, B. M., & Dingus, T. A. (2011). Driver comprehension of multiple haptic seat alerts intended for use in an integrated collision avoidance system. Transport Res F: Traffic Psychol Behav, 14(4), 278–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2011.02.001.
Gold, C., Damböck, D., Lorenz, L., & Bengler, K. (2013). “Take over!” how long does it take to get the driver back into the loop? In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting (Vol. 57, no. 1) (pp. 1938–1942). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213571433.
Hester, M., Lee, K., & Dyre, B. P. (2017). “Driver take over”: A preliminary exploration of driver trust and performance in autonomous vehicles. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting (Vol. 61, no. 1) (pp. 1969–1973). Los Angeles: Sage CA: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541931213601971.
Kim, H. J., & Yang, J. H. (2017). Takeover requests in simulated partially autonomous vehicles considering human factors. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 47(5), 735–740. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2017.2674998.
Kim, J. W., & Yang, J. H. (2020). Understanding metrics of vehicle control take-over requests in simulated automated vehicles. Int J Automot Technol, 21(3), 757–770. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12239-020-0074-z.
Kwon, D., & Jung, E. S. (2019). Effects of modalities of non-driving related tasks on Driver's stress and driving performance during autonomous driving. J Ergon Soc Korea, 38(3), 265–277. https://doi.org/10.5143/JESK.2019.38.3.265.
Kyriakidis, M., Happee, R., & De Winter, J. C. F. (2015). Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transport Res F: Traffic Psychol Behav, 32, 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.04.014.
Lin, C. T., Huang, T. Y., Liang, W. C., Chiu, T. T., Chao, C. F., Hsu, S. H., & Ko, L. W. (2009). Assessing effectiveness of various auditory warning signals in maintaining drivers' attention in virtual reality-based driving environments. Percept Mot Skills, 108(3), 825–835. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.108.3.825-835.
Louw, T., & Merat, N. (2017). Are you in the loop? Using gaze dispersion to understand driver visual attention during vehicle automation. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 76, 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.01.001.
Melcher, V., Rauh, S., Diederichs, F., Widlroither, H., & Bauer, W. (2015). Take-over requests for automated driving. Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 2867–2873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.788.
Naujoks, F., Mai, C., & Neukum, A. (2014). The effect of urgency of take-over requests during highly automated driving under distraction conditions. Advances in human aspects of transportation, 7(part I), 431–438.
NHTSA. (2016). Human factors design guidance for driver-vehicle interfaces. Washington, D.C: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transporation.
Park, M., & Son, J. (2017). Reference test scenarios for assessing the safety of take-over in a conditionally autonomous vehicle. Trans of KSAE, 27(4), 309–317. https://doi.org/10.7467/KSAE.2019.27.4.309.
Petermeijer, S. M., Bazilinskyy, P., Bengler, K., & De Winter, J. C. F. (2017). Take-over again: Investigating multimodal and directional TORs to get the driver back into the loop. Appl Ergon, 62, 204–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2017.02.023.
Politis, I. (2016). Effects of modality, urgency and situation on responses to multimodal warnings for driversDoctoral dissertation. University of Glasgow. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4592.3842.
Richardson, A. (2010). Nonparametric statistics for non-statisticians: A step-by-step approach by Gregory W. Corder, dale I. Foreman International Statistical Review, 78(3), 451–452. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-5823.2010.00122_6.x.
Riener, A., Jeon, M., Alvarez, I., & Frison, A. K. (2017). Driver in the loop: Best practices in automotive sensing and feedback mechanisms. In Automotive user interfaces (pp. 295–323). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49448-7_11.
SAE On-Road Automated Vehicle Standards Committee. (2018). Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. Warrendale: SAE International https://saemobilus.sae.org/content/j3016_201806.
Telpaz, A., Rhindress, B., Zelman, I., & Tsimhoni, O. (2015). Haptic seat for automated driving: Preparing the driver to take control effectively. In Proceedings of the 7th international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications (pp. 23–30). Nottingham: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2799250.2799267.
Yoon, S. H., Kim, Y. W., & Ji, Y. G. (2019). The effects of takeover request modalities on highly automated car control transitions. Accid Anal Prev, 123, 150–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.11.018.
Yun, H., Lee, J. W., Yang, H. D., & Yang, J. H. (2018). Experimental Design for Multi-modal Take-over Request for automated driving. In International conference on human-computer interaction, Las Vegas, USA, July 15–20, 2018 (pp. 418–425). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92285-0_57.