When highly automated vehicles reach their system limits, the vehicles' control is handed back to the driver by issuing a takeover request (TOR). Each of these takeover situations is different from the other. The shift of control can be hazardous. This study investigated whether a match between the urgency of a TOR and the criticality of the situation benefits drivers regarding their takeover performance and subjective experience. Fifty-two participants experienced two takeover situations with varying criticality (3 s or 7 s time budget). A low urgent, auditory-tactile TOR was presented to half of the participants. The other half experienced a highly urgent, auditory-tactile TOR. This resulted in two conditions, in which the TOR-urgency and the situational criticality matched, e.g. urgent TOR and highly critical situation, and in two conditions, in which the TOR-urgency and the situational criticality did not match. Results indicate that a TOR-urgency that matches the criticality of the driving situation does not benefit drivers. However, drivers generally performed better in takeover situations with low criticality and they took over faster in takeover situations with high criticality. Implications of the results and future work are discussed.
Should the urgency of auditory-tactile takeover requests match the criticality of takeover situations?
2018-11-01
344089 byte
Conference paper
Electronic Resource
English
TAKEOVER URGENCY DETERMINATION METHOD AND TAKEOVER WARNING METHOD FOR AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE, AND SYSTEM
European Patent Office | 2023
|European Patent Office | 2024
|