Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
126 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
47 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
43 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
47 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Developing Situational Awareness for Joint Action with Autonomous Vehicles (2404.11800v1)

Published 17 Apr 2024 in cs.HC, cs.AI, and cs.RO

Abstract: Unanswered questions about how human-AV interaction designers can support rider's informational needs hinders Autonomous Vehicles (AV) adoption. To achieve joint human-AV action goals - such as safe transportation, trust, or learning from an AV - sufficient situational awareness must be held by the human, AV, and human-AV system collectively. We present a systems-level framework that integrates cognitive theories of joint action and situational awareness as a means to tailor communications that meet the criteria necessary for goal success. This framework is based on four components of the shared situation: AV traits, action goals, subject-specific traits and states, and the situated driving context. AV communications should be tailored to these factors and be sensitive when they change. This framework can be useful for understanding individual, shared, and distributed human-AV situational awareness and designing for future AV communications that meet the informational needs and goals of diverse groups and in diverse driving contexts.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (69)
  1. Explainable artificial intelligence for autonomous driving: A comprehensive overview and field guide for future research directions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11561 (2021).
  2. Modeling dispositional and initial learned trust in automated vehicles with predictability and explainability. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour 77 (2021), 102–116.
  3. Martin Baumann and Josef F Krems. 2007. Situation awareness and driving: A cognitive model. In Modelling driver behaviour in automotive environments: Critical issues in driver interactions with intelligent transport systems. Springer, 253–265.
  4. Izak Benbasat and Weiquan Wang. 2005. Trust in and adoption of online recommendation agents. Journal of the association for information systems 6, 3 (2005), 4.
  5. Human-vehicle interaction to support driver’s situation awareness in automated vehicles: a systematic review. IEEE Transactions on intelligent vehicles 8, 3 (2022), 2551–2567.
  6. Convey situation awareness in conditionally automated driving with a haptic seat. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings. 161–165.
  7. Owner manuals review and taxonomy of ADAS limitations in partially automated vehicles. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. 156–164.
  8. Don’t speak and drive: cognitive workload of in-vehicle speech interactions. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. 99–104.
  9. Situation awareness-based agent transparency and human-autonomy teaming effectiveness. Theoretical issues in ergonomics science 19, 3 (2018), 259–282.
  10. Situation awareness-based agent transparency. US Army Research Laboratory April (2014), 1–29.
  11. Jong Kyu Choi and Yong Gu Ji. 2015. Investigating the importance of trust on adopting an autonomous vehicle. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 31, 10 (2015), 692–702.
  12. William J Clancey. 1997. Situated cognition: On human knowledge and computer representations. Cambridge university press.
  13. Knowing me, knowing you: theory of mind in AI. Psychological medicine 50, 7 (2020), 1057–1061.
  14. Cooperative AI: machines must learn to find common ground.
  15. Arun Das and Paul Rad. 2020. Opportunities and challenges in explainable artificial intelligence (xai): A survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.11371 (2020).
  16. Designing an AI-companion to support the driver in highly autonomous cars. In Human-Computer Interaction. Multimodal and Natural Interaction: Thematic Area, HCI 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd International Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 22. Springer, 335–349.
  17. How to increase automated vehicles’ acceptance through in-vehicle interaction design: A review. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 37, 4 (2021), 308–330.
  18. The role of trust in automation reliance. International journal of human-computer studies 58, 6 (2003), 697–718.
  19. Creating appropriate trust in automated vehicle systems: A framework for HMI design. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 48, 1 (2017), 95–101.
  20. Mica R Endsley. 1988. Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). In Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 national aerospace and electronics conference. IEEE, 789–795.
  21. Mica R Endsley. 1995. Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human factors 37, 1 (1995), 32–64.
  22. Daniel J Fagnant and Kara Kockelman. 2015. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 77 (2015), 167–181.
  23. Priscilla Ferronato and Masooda Bashir. 2020. An examination of dispositional trust in human and autonomous system interactions. In Human-Computer Interaction. Human Values and Quality of Life: Thematic Area, HCI 2020, Held as Part of the 22nd International Conference, HCII 2020, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 19–24, 2020, Proceedings, Part III 22. Springer, 420–435.
  24. Expanded situational awareness without vision: a novel haptic interface for use in fully autonomous vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. 54–62.
  25. In UX we trust: Investigation of aesthetics and usability of driver-vehicle interfaces and their impact on the perception of automated driving. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–13.
  26. Explainable active learning (xal) toward ai explanations as interfaces for machine teachers. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW3 (2021), 1–28.
  27. David Gunning and David Aha. 2019. DARPA’s explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) program. AI magazine 40, 2 (2019), 44–58.
  28. In automatic we trust: investigating the impact of trust, control, personality characteristics, and extrinsic and intrinsic motivations on the acceptance of autonomous vehicles. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 35, 19 (2019), 1769–1780.
  29. Kevin Anthony Hoff and Masooda Bashir. 2015. Trust in automation: Integrating empirical evidence on factors that influence trust. Human factors 57, 3 (2015), 407–434.
  30. Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 7, 2 (2000), 174–196.
  31. Enhanced auditory menu cues improve dual task performance and are preferred with in-vehicle technologies. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on automotive user interfaces and interactive vehicular applications. 91–98.
  32. Learning Racing From an AI Coach: Effects of Multimodal Autonomous Driving Explanations on Driving Performance, Cognitive Load, Expertise, and Trust. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.04206 (2024).
  33. Robert Kaufman and David Kirsh. 2023. Explainable AI And Visual Reasoning: Insights From Radiology. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.03318 (2023).
  34. Robert A Kaufman and David Kirsh. 2022. Cognitive differences in human and AI explanation. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Vol. 44.
  35. David Kirsh. 2009. Problem solving and situated cognition. (2009).
  36. Measurement of trust in automation: A narrative review and reference guide. Frontiers in psychology 12 (2021), 604977.
  37. Why did my car just do that? Explaining semi-autonomous driving actions to improve driver understanding, trust, and performance. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) 9 (2015), 269–275.
  38. Josef F Krems and Martin RK Baumann. 2009. Driving and situation awareness: A cognitive model of memory-update processes. In Human Centered Design: First International Conference, HCD 2009, Held as Part of HCI International 2009, San Diego, CA, USA, July 19-24, 2009 Proceedings 1. Springer, 986–994.
  39. A supportive situation awareness model for human-autonomy teaming in collaborative driving. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science 21, 6 (2020), 658–683.
  40. Miao Liu and Bo Qi. 2023. Design study on the effect of intelligent vehicles interaction mode on drivers’ cognitive load. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 42–57.
  41. Towards adaptive ambient in-vehicle displays and interactions: Insights and design guidelines from the 2015 AutomotiveUI dedicated workshop. Automotive User Interfaces: Creating Interactive Experiences in the Car (2017), 325–348.
  42. Ruiqi Ma and David B Kaber. 2007. Situation awareness and driving performance in a simulated navigation task. Ergonomics 50, 8 (2007), 1351–1364.
  43. Nikola Marangunić and Andrina Granić. 2015. Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal access in the information society 14 (2015), 81–95.
  44. Lars Meyer-Waarden and Julien Cloarec. 2022. “Baby, you can drive my car”: Psychological antecedents that drive consumers’ adoption of AI-powered autonomous vehicles. Technovation 109 (2022), 102348.
  45. Building trust in autonomous vehicles: Role of virtual reality driving simulators in HMI design. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 68, 10 (2019), 9438–9450.
  46. A review of non-driving-related tasks used in studies on automated driving. In Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation: Proceedings of the AHFE 2017 International Conference on Human Factors in Transportation, July 17- 21, 2017, The Westin Bonaventure Hotel, Los Angeles, California, USA 8. Springer, 525–537.
  47. Albert A Nofi. 2000. Defining and measuring shared situational awareness. (2000).
  48. Why not explain? effects of explanations on human perceptions of autonomous driving. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Robotics and Its Social Impacts (ARSO). IEEE, 194–199.
  49. Expert-informed, user-centric explanations for machine learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 36. 12280–12286.
  50. Judea Pearl and Dana Mackenzie. 2018. The book of why: the new science of cause and effect. Basic books.
  51. David Premack and Guy Woodruff. 1978. Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind? Behavioral and brain sciences 1, 4 (1978), 515–526.
  52. Exploring the situational awareness of humans inside autonomous vehicles. In 2018 21st International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC). IEEE, 190–197.
  53. Jan Reich and Mario Trapp. 2020. SINADRA: towards a framework for assurable situation-aware dynamic risk assessment of autonomous vehicles. In 2020 16th European dependable computing conference (EDCC). IEEE, 47–50.
  54. Situation awareness in team performance: Implications for measurement and training. Human factors 37, 1 (1995), 123–136.
  55. Paul M Salmon and Katherine L Plant. 2022. Distributed situation awareness: From awareness in individuals and teams to the awareness of technologies, sociotechnical systems, and societies. Applied Ergonomics 98 (2022), 103599.
  56. 13 Distributed Situation Awareness and Vehicle Automation. Handbook of human factors for automated, connected, and intelligent vehicles (2020).
  57. Measuring and predicting shared situation awareness in teams. Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making 3, 3 (2009), 280–308.
  58. Text comprehension: Heads-up vs. auditory displays: Implications for a productive work environment in sae level 3 automated vehicles. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. 342–354.
  59. Context-aware computing applications. In 1994 first workshop on mobile computing systems and applications. IEEE, 85–90.
  60. Joint action: bodies and minds moving together. Trends in cognitive sciences 10, 2 (2006), 70–76.
  61. Toward measurement of situation awareness in autonomous vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 405–415.
  62. User-centric enhancements to explainable ai algorithms for image classification. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Vol. 44.
  63. Situational awareness and safety. Safety science 39, 3 (2001), 189–204.
  64. Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: theoretical development and application of an ergonomics methodology. Ergonomics 49, 12-13 (2006), 1288–1311.
  65. Silvia Tulli and David W Aha. 2024. Explainable Agency in Artificial Intelligence: Research and Practice. CRC Press.
  66. Defining and substantiating the terms scene, situation, and scenario for automated driving. In 2015 IEEE 18th international conference on intelligent transportation systems. IEEE, 982–988.
  67. Eric S Vorm and David JY Combs. 2022. Integrating transparency, trust, and acceptance: The intelligent systems technology acceptance model (ISTAM). International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 38, 18-20 (2022), 1828–1845.
  68. Towards mutual theory of mind in human-ai interaction: How language reflects what students perceive about a virtual teaching assistant. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–14.
  69. I drive-you trust: Explaining driving behavior of autonomous cars. In Extended abstracts of the 2019 chi conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–6.
Citations (4)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets