Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회지)

Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Review on the Transitions of Control Authority in Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS)

첨단운전지원시스템의 제어권 이양에 대한 리뷰

  • Park, Jungchul (Korea National University of Transportation, Department of Safety Engineering)
  • 박정철 (한국교통대학교 산업경영.안전공학부 안전공학전공)
  • Received : 2017.09.19
  • Accepted : 2017.10.20
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to review the existing studies on the user interface of advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS), especially focusing on the transitions of control authority. It also suggests some implications for the interface design. Background: With the advent of autonomous driving and the increasing adoption of ADAS, the importance of ergonomic design for the driver interface of ADAS is increasingly emphasized. Method: In this study, recent studies on the ADAS interface were reviewed in three aspects (the effect of automation level, the display design/evaluation, and control design/evaluation). Existing models of the allocation of control authority between driver and vehicle were also examined. Results: Various results have been obtained due to differences in experimental conditions and environments. However, in general, as the level of automation by ADAS increases, the workload decreases, while the level of situation awareness decreases and the response time increases. Motivations for the control authority transition and implications for the interface design are discussed. Conclusion: The interface that effectively monitors and presents the performance and conditions of the driver and the system is expected to provide assistance in various situations of authority transition. Application: The results of this study might help to explore, understand, and refine related research topics.

Keywords

References

  1. Albert, M., Lange, A., Schmidt, A., Wimmer, M. and Bengler, K., Automated driving - Assessment of interaction concepts under real driving conditions, Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 2832-2839, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.767
  2. Bashiri, B. and Mann, D.D., Automation and the situation awareness of drivers in agricultural semi-autonomous vehicles, Biosystems Engineering, 124, 8-15, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2014.06.002
  3. Biondi, F., Rossi, R., Gastaldi, M. and Mulatti, C., Beeping ADAS: Reflexive effect on drivers' behavior, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 25, 27-33, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.020
  4. Biondi, F., Strayer, D.L., Rossi, R., Gastaldi, M. and Mulatti, C., Advanced driver assistance systems: Using multimodal redundant warnings to enhance road safety, Applied Ergonomics, 58, 238-244, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.06.016
  5. Brookhuis, K.A., van Driel, C.J.G., Hof, T., van Arem, B. and Hoedemaeker, M., Driving with a congestion assistant: mental workload and acceptance, Applied Ergonomics, 40, 1019-25, 2008.
  6. de Winter, J.C.F., Happee, R., Martens, M.H. and Stanton, N.A., Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 196-217, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.06.016
  7. Dambock, D., Weissgerber, T., Kienle, M. and Bengler, K., "Requirements for cooperative vehicle guidance", Proceedings of the 16th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC 2013), pp. 1656-1661, 2013.
  8. Endsley, M.R. and Kaber, D.B., Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task, Ergonomics, 42, 462-492, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401399185595
  9. Gold, C., Dambock, D., Lorenz, L. and Bengler, K., "Take over!" How long does it take to get the driver back into the loop?", Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 57, 2013.
  10. Inagaki, T., Design of human-machine interactions in light of domain-dependence of human-centered automation, Cognition, Technology & Work, 8, 161-167, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-006-0034-z
  11. Kaber, D.B. and Endsley, M.R., Out of the loop performance problems and the use of intermediate levels of automation for improved control system functioning and safety, Process Safety Progress, 16, 126-131, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.680160304
  12. Kaber, D.B., Perry, C.M., Segall, N., McClernon, C.K. and Prinzel, L.J., Situation awareness implications of adaptive automation for information processing in an air traffic control-related task, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36, 447-462, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2006.01.008
  13. Kuehn, M., Hummel, T. and Bende, J., "Benefit Estimation of Advanced Driver Assistance Systems for Cars Derived from Real-Life Accidents", Proceedings of the 21st International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles, Stuttgart, Ger., 1-10, 2009.
  14. Larsson, A.F.L., Kircher, K. and Hultgren, J.A., Learning from experience: Familiarity with ACC and responding to a cut-in situation in automated driving, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 229-237, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.05.008
  15. Levitan, L., Golembiewski, G. and Bloomfield, J.R., Human factors issues for automated highway systems, ITS Journal, 21-47, 1998.
  16. Lu, Z. and de Winter, J.C.F., A review and framework of control authority transitions in automated driving, Procedia Manufacturing, 3, 2510-2517, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.513
  17. Merat, N., Jamson, A.H., Lai, F.F.C.H., Daly, M. and Carsten, O.M.J., Transition to manual: Driver behaviour when resuming control from a highly automated vehicle, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 274-282, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.09.005
  18. Merat, N., Jamson, H.A., Lai, F. and Carsten, O., Human factors of highly automated driving: Results from the EASY and CityMobil Projects. In Meyer G., Beiker S. (Eds), Road vehicle automation, Springer International, 113-125, 2014.
  19. Naujoks, F., Mai, C. and Neukum, A., "The effect of urgency of take-over requests during highly automated driving under distraction conditions", Proceedings of the AHFE '14, 431-438, 2014.
  20. Naujoks, F., Purucker, C., Neukum, A., Wolter, S. and Steiger, R., Controllability of Partially Automated Driving functions - Does it matter whether drivers are allowed to take their hands off the steering wheel?, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 35, 185-198, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.10.022
  21. NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration), Federal Automated Vehicles Policy - Accelerating the Next Revolution in Roadway Safety. 2016.
  22. Nilsson, L., "Safety effects of Adaptive Cruise Control in critical traffic situations", Proceedings of the Second World Congress on Intelligent Transportation Systems: 'Step Forward', 3 (pp. 1254-9). Tokyo: VERTIS, 1995.
  23. Nilsson, J., Strand, N., Falcone, P. and Vinter, J., "Driver performance in the presence of adaptive cruise control related failures: Implications for safety analysis and fault tolerance", Proceedings of the 43rd Annual IEEE/IFIP Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks Workshop, 1-10, 2013.
  24. Parasuraman, R. and Riley, V., Humans and Automations: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse, Human Factors, 39, 230-253, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872097778543886
  25. Richards, D. and Stedmon, A., To delegate or not to delegate: A review of control frameworks for autonomous cars, Applied Ergonomics, 53, 383-388, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2015.10.011
  26. Rudin-Brown, C.M. and Parker, H.A., Behavioural adaptation to adaptive cruise control (ACC): implications for preventive strategies. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 7, 59-76, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2004.02.001
  27. Smith, B.W., SAE Levels of Driving Automation, http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/12/sae-levels-driving-automation (retrieved September 1, 2017), 2013.
  28. SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) International, On-Road Automated Driving (Orad) Committee J3016_201609 - Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles, 2016.
  29. Stanton, N.A. and Young, M.S., Driver behaviour with Adaptive Cruise Control. Ergonomics, 15(48), 1294-1313, 2005.
  30. Stanton, N.A., Young, M.S. and Walker, G.H., The Psychology of Driving Automation: A discussion with Prof. Don Norman. International Journal of Vehicle Design, 45, 289-306, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVD.2007.014906
  31. Stanton, N.A., Dunoyer, A. and Leatherland, A., Detection of new in-path targets by drivers using Stop & Go Adaptive Cruise Control, Applied Ergonomics, 42, 592-601, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2010.08.016
  32. Strand, N., Nilsson, J., Karlsson, I.C.M. and Nilsson, L., Semi-automated versus highly automated driving in critical situations caused by automation failures, Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 27, 218-228, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2014.04.005
  33. Treat, J.R., Tri-level Study of the Causes of Traffic Accidents, Institute for Research in Public Safety, Indiana University, 1979.
  34. Young, M.S. and Stanton, N.A., Back to the future: Brake reaction times for manual and automated vehicles, Ergonomics, 50, 46-58, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130600980789
  35. Zeeb, K., Buchner, A. and Schrauf, M., What determines the take-over time? An integrated model approach of driver take-over after automated driving, Accident Analysis & Prevention, 78, 212-221, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.02.023