Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
175 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Beyond the Dashboard: Investigating Distracted Driver Communication Preferences for ADAS (2403.03312v2)

Published 5 Mar 2024 in cs.HC

Abstract: Distracted driving is a major cause of road fatalities. With improvements in driver (in)attention detection, these distracted situations can be caught early to alert drivers and improve road safety and comfort. However, drivers may have differing preferences for the modes of such communication based on the driving scenario and their current distraction state. To this end, we present an (N=147) where videos of simulated driving scenarios were utilized to learn drivers preferences for modes of communication and their evolution with the drivers changing attention. The survey queried participants preferred modes of communication for scenarios such as collisions or stagnation at a green light. that inform the future of communication between drivers and their vehicles. We showcase the different driver preferences based on the nature of the driving scenario and also show that they evolve as the drivers distraction state changes

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (47)
  1. T. Stewart, “Overview of motor vehicle traffic crashes in 2021,” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Tech. Rep., 2023.
  2. A. Kashevnik, R. Shchedrin, C. Kaiser, and A. Stocker, “Driver distraction detection methods: A literature review and framework,” IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 60 063–60 076, 2021.
  3. Y. Shen, N. Wijayaratne, P. Sriram, A. Hasan, P. Du, and K. Driggs-Campbell, “Cocatt: A cognitive-conditioned driver attention dataset,” in 2022 IEEE 25th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 2022.
  4. D. Perera, Y.-K. Wang, C.-T. Lin, H. Nguyen, and R. Chai, “Improving eeg-based driver distraction classification using brain connectivity estimators,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 16, 2022.
  5. T. Arakawa, “A review of heartbeat detection systems for automotive applications,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 18, 2021.
  6. K. Park, J. Kwahk, S. H. Han, M. Song, D. G. Choi, H. Jang, D. Kim, Y. D. Won, and I. S. Jeong, “Modelling the intrusive feelings of advanced driver assistance systems based on vehicle activity log data: Case study for the lane keeping assistance system,” International journal of automotive technology, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 455–463, 2019.
  7. S. Brandenburg and S. Epple, “Drivers’ individual design preferences of takeover requests in highly automated driving,” i-com, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 167–178, 2019.
  8. S. Corporation, “Subaru all-around safety,” 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.subaru-global.com/ebrochure/Forester/2020my/ISEN/safety/index.html
  9. N. Dunn, T. Dingus, and S. Soccolich, “Understanding the impact of technology: Do advanced driver assistance and semi-automated vehicle systems lead to improper driving behavior?” AAA, Tech. Rep., 2019. [Online]. Available: https://newsroom.aaa.com/asset/over-reliance-of-adas-report-foundation-dec-2019/
  10. J. L. Campbell, J. L. Brown, J. S. Graving, C. M. Richard, M. G. Lichty, L. P. Bacon, J. F. Morgan, H. Li, D. N. Williams, and T. Sanquist, “Human factors design guidance for driver-vehicle interfaces,” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Tech. Rep., August 2018.
  11. N. Lerner, J. Singer, R. Huey, T. Brown, D. Marshall, S. Chrysler, R. Schmitt, C. L. Baldwin, J. L. Eisert, B. Lewis, A. I. Bakker, and D. P. Chiang, “Driver-vehicle interfaces for advanced crash warning systems: Research on evaluation methods and warning signals,” National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Tech. Rep., November 2015.
  12. J. Stutts, J. Feaganes, E. Rodgman, C. Hamlett, D. Reinfurt, K. Gish, M. Mercadante, and L. Staplin, “The causes and consequences of distraction in everyday driving,” Annual proceedings / Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine. Association for the Advancement of Automotive Medicine, vol. 47, pp. 235–51, 02 2003.
  13. P. A. Hancock, R. J. Jagacinski, R. Parasuraman, C. D. Wickens, G. F. Wilson, and D. B. Kaber, “Human-automation interaction research: Past, present, and future,” Ergonomics in Design, vol. 21, no. 2, p. 9 – 14, 2013.
  14. S. Boverie, M. Cour, and J. Le Gall, “Adapted human machine interaction concept for driver assistance systems driveasy,” IFAC Proceedings Volumes, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 2242–2247, 2011.
  15. C. Olaverri-Monreal, A. E. Hasan, J. Bulut, M. Körber, and K. Bengler, “Impact of in-vehicle displays location preferences on drivers’ performance and gaze,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 1770–1780, 2014.
  16. M. Berger, D. Dey, A. Dandekar, B. Barati, R. Bernhaupt, and B. Pfleging, “Together in the car: A comparison of five concepts to support driver-passenger collaboration,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 2022, p. 183–194.
  17. B. H. Topliss, S. M. Pampel, G. Burnett, and J. L. Gabbard, “Evaluating head-up displays across windshield locations,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2019, p. 244–253.
  18. K. Harrington, D. R. Large, G. Burnett, and O. Georgiou, “Exploring the use of mid-air ultrasonic feedback to enhance automotive user interfaces,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2018, p. 11–20.
  19. A.-M. Meck and L. Precht, “How to design the perfect prompt: A linguistic approach to prompt design in automotive voice assistants – an exploratory study,” in 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 237–246.
  20. G. Kim and Y. G. Ji, “Visual aided speech interface to reduce driver distraction,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2019, p. 205–208.
  21. A. de Ruiter and M. B. Alonso, “Designing haptic effects on an accelerator pedal to support a positive eco-driving experience,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2019, p. 319–328.
  22. M. Wang, S. C. Lee, G. Montavon, J. Qin, and M. Jeon, “Conversational voice agents are preferred and lead to better driving performance in conditionally automated vehicles,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2022, p. 86–95.
  23. P. N. Y. Wong, D. P. Brumby, H. V. R. Babu, and K. Kobayashi, “Voices in self-driving cars should be assertive to more quickly grab a distracted driver’s attention,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2019, p. 165–176.
  24. D.-B. Vo and S. Brewster, “Investigating the effect of tactile input and output locations for drivers’ hands on in-car tasks performance,” in 12th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, 2020, p. 1–8.
  25. Z. Cui, H. Gong, Y. Wang, C. Shen, W. Zou, and S. Luo, “Enhancing interactions for in-car voice user interface with gestural input on the steering wheel,” in 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 59–68.
  26. N. Du, F. Zhou, D. Tilbury, L. P. Robert, and X. J. Yang, “Designing alert systems in takeover transitions: The effects of display information and modality,” in 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 173–180.
  27. A. Gomaa, A. Alles, E. Meiser, L. H. Rupp, M. Molz, and G. Reyes, “What’s on your mind? a mental and perceptual load estimation framework towards adaptive in-vehicle interaction while driving,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications.   Association for Computing Machinery, 2022, p. 215–225.
  28. D. Yi, J. Su, L. Hu, C. Liu, M. Quddus, M. Dianati, and W.-H. Chen, “Implicit personalization in driving assistance: State-of-the-art and open issues,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 397–413, 2020.
  29. C. P. Janssen, L. N. Boyle, A. L. Kun, W. Ju, and L. L. Chuang, “A hidden markov framework to capture human–machine interaction in automated vehicles,” International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, vol. 35, no. 11, pp. 947–955, 2019.
  30. J. P. P. Jokinen and T. Kujala, “Modelling drivers’ adaptation to assistance systems,” in 13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, ser. AutomotiveUI ’21.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 12–19.
  31. A. Hasan, N. Chakraborty, H. Chen, J.-H. Cho, C. Wu, and K. Driggs-Campbell, “PeRP: Personalized residual policies for congestion mitigation through co-operative advisory systems,” in IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITSC), 2023.
  32. M. Hasenjäger, M. Heckmann, and H. Wersing, “A survey of personalization for advanced driver assistance systems,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 335–344, 2020.
  33. L. Rittger, D. Engelhardt, and R. Schwartz, “Adaptive user experience in the car—levels of adaptivity and adaptive hmi design,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 4866–4876, 2022.
  34. K. Keller, H. Jöntgen, B. M. Abdel-Karim, and O. Hinz, “User cognition antecedents of smart assistant systems in cars,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 37–53, 2023.
  35. A. Dosovitskiy, G. Ros, F. Codevilla, A. Lopez, and V. Koltun, “CARLA: An open urban driving simulator,” in Proceedings of the 1st Annual Conference on Robot Learning, 2017, pp. 1–16.
  36. U. Health, “Sleep disorders: Drowsy driving,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.uclahealth.org/medical-services/sleep-disorders/patient-resources/patient-education/drowsy-driving
  37. B. Shiferaw, C. Stough, and L. Downey, “Drivers’ visual scanning impairment under the influences of alcohol and distraction: A literature review,” Current Drug Abuse Reviews, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 174–182, 2014.
  38. S. S. Soleimanloo, V. E. Wilkinson, J. M. Cori, J. Westlake, B. Stevens, L. A. Downey, B. A. Shiferaw, S. M. W. Rajaratnam, and M. E. Howard, “Eye-blink parameters detect on-road track-driving impairment following severe sleep deprivation,” Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, vol. 15, no. 09, pp. 1271–1284, 2019.
  39. A. S. McDonnell, T. G. Simmons, G. G. Erickson, M. Lohani, J. M. Cooper, and D. L. Strayer, “This is your brain on autopilot: Neural indices of driver workload and engagement during partial vehicle automation,” Human Factors, vol. 0, no. 0, p. 00187208211039091, 2021.
  40. P. Tejero and J. Roca, “Messages beyond the phone: Processing variable message signs while attending hands-free phone calls,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 150, p. 105870, 2021.
  41. Tesla, Inc., “Tesla owners manual,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/models/en_us/GUID-29A7E205-A689-41D1-B69C-3AE821CB70E7.html
  42. M. G. Kendall, “A New Measure Of Rank Corellation,” Biometrika, vol. 30, no. 1-2, pp. 81–93, 06 1938.
  43. C. Spearman, “The proof and measurement of association between two things,” The American Journal of Psychology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 72–101, 1904. [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1412159
  44. W. Webber, A. Moffat, and J. Zobel, “A similarity measure for indefinite rankings,” ACM Trans. Inf. Syst., vol. 28, no. 4, nov 2010.
  45. P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, S. J. van der Walt, M. Brett, J. Wilson, K. J. Millman, N. Mayorov, A. R. J. Nelson, E. Jones, R. Kern, E. Larson, C. J. Carey, İ. Polat, Y. Feng, E. W. Moore, J. VanderPlas, D. Laxalde, J. Perktold, R. Cimrman, I. Henriksen, E. A. Quintero, C. R. Harris, A. M. Archibald, A. H. Ribeiro, F. Pedregosa, P. van Mulbregt, and SciPy 1.0 Contributors, “SciPy 1.0: Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python,” Nature Methods, vol. 17, pp. 261–272, 2020.
  46. C. Chen et al., “rbo,” https://github.com/changyaochen/rbo, 2021.
  47. R. A. Fisher, “On the interpretation of χ𝜒\chiitalic_χ2 from contingency tables, and the calculation of p,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, vol. 85, no. 1, pp. 87–94, 1922. [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2340521

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