Takeover Time in Highly Automated Vehicles: Noncritical Transitions to and From Manual Control

Objective: The aim of this study was to review existing research into driver control transitions and to determine the time it takes drivers to resume control from a highly automated vehicle in noncritical scenarios. Background: Contemporary research has moved from an inclusive design approach to adhering only to mean/median values when designing control transitions in automated driving. Research into control transitions in highly automated driving has focused on urgent scenarios where drivers are given a relatively short time span to respond to a request to resume manual control. We found a paucity in research into more frequent scenarios for control transitions, such as planned exits from highway systems. Method: Twenty-six drivers drove two scenarios with an automated driving feature activated. Drivers were asked to read a newspaper, or to monitor the system, and to relinquish, or resume, control from the automation when prompted by vehicle systems. Results: Significantly longer control transition times were found between driving with and without secondary tasks. Control transition times were substantially longer than those reported in the peer-reviewed literature. Conclusion: We found that drivers take longer to resume control when under no time pressure compared with that reported in the literature. Moreover, we found that drivers occupied by a secondary task exhibit larger variance and slower responses to requests to resume control. Workload scores implied optimal workload. Application: Intra- and interindividual differences need to be accommodated by vehicle manufacturers and policy makers alike to ensure inclusive design of contemporary systems and safety during control transitions.

[1]  Heikki Summala,et al.  Brake reaction times and driver behavior analysis , 2000 .

[2]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Transition to manual: driver behaviour when resuming control from a highly automated vehicle , 2014 .

[3]  Mark S. Young,et al.  Drive-by-wire: The case of driver workload and reclaiming control with adaptive cruise control , 1997 .

[4]  Neville A. Stanton,et al.  Detection of new in-path targets by drivers using Stop & Go Adaptive Cruise Control. , 2011, Applied ergonomics.

[5]  Neville A. Stanton,et al.  From fly-by-wire to drive-by-wire: Safety implications of automation in vehicles , 1996 .

[6]  Frederik Diederichs,et al.  Take-Over Requests for Automated Driving , 2015 .

[7]  Victoria A Banks,et al.  Keep the driver in control: Automating automobiles of the future. , 2016, Applied ergonomics.

[8]  Michael Weber,et al.  Autonomous driving: investigating the feasibility of car-driver handover assistance , 2015, AutomotiveUI.

[9]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  Taking Over Control From Highly Automated Vehicles in Complex Traffic Situations , 2016, Hum. Factors.

[10]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Highly Automated Driving, Secondary Task Performance, and Driver State , 2012, Hum. Factors.

[11]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  Vibrotactile Displays: A Survey With a View on Highly Automated Driving , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[12]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Driver Inattention During Vehicle Automation: How Does Driver Engagement Affect Resumption Of Control? , 2015 .

[13]  Moritz Körber,et al.  Prediction of take-over time in highly automated driving by two psychometric tests , 2015 .

[14]  Lorrie Faith Cranor,et al.  A Framework for Reasoning About the Human in the Loop , 2008, UPSEC.

[15]  Neville A Stanton,et al.  Back to the future: Brake reaction times for manual and automated vehicles , 2007, Ergonomics.

[16]  Susan G. Hill,et al.  Traditional and raw task load index (TLX) correlations: Are paired comparisons necessary? In A , 1989 .

[17]  Alexandra Neukum,et al.  Advisory warnings based on cooperative perception , 2014, 2014 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium Proceedings.

[18]  Mascha C. van der Voort,et al.  The influence of time-criticality on Situation Awareness when retrieving human control after automated driving , 2013, ITSC.

[19]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  “Take over!” How long does it take to get the driver back into the loop? , 2013 .

[20]  Lisanne Bainbridge,et al.  Ironies of automation , 1982, Autom..

[21]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  Influence of Automated Brake Application on Take-Over Situations in Highly Automated Driving Scenarios , 2014 .

[22]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  How the Duration of Automated Driving Influences Take-Over Performance and Gaze Behavior , 2017 .

[23]  Renaud Deborne,et al.  Evaluating the shift of control between driver and vehicle at high automation at low speed: the role of anticipation , 2014 .

[24]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[25]  David B. Kaber,et al.  Out‐of‐the‐loop performance problems and the use of intermediate levels of automation for improved control system functioning and safety , 1997 .

[26]  Nadja Schömig,et al.  The Interaction Between Highly Automated Driving and the Development of Drowsiness , 2015 .

[27]  Mia Hubert,et al.  An adjusted boxplot for skewed distributions , 2008, Comput. Stat. Data Anal..

[28]  Kathrin Zeeb,et al.  What determines the take-over time? An integrated model approach of driver take-over after automated driving. , 2015, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[29]  Josef Nilsson,et al.  Safe Transitions to Manual Driving From Faulty Automated Driving System , 2014 .

[30]  Natasha Merat,et al.  Engaging with Highly Automated Driving: To be or Not to be in the Loop? , 2017 .

[31]  Kathrin Zeeb,et al.  Is take-over time all that matters? The impact of visual-cognitive load on driver take-over quality after conditionally automated driving. , 2016, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[32]  Geert Heijenk,et al.  Automated Merging in a Cooperative Adaptive Cruise Control (CACC) System , 2011 .

[33]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  Ubernahmezeiten beim hochautomatisierten Autofahren , 2012 .

[34]  M R Endsley,et al.  Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. , 1999, Ergonomics.

[35]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  Fatigue and Automation-Induced Impairments in Simulated Driving Performance , 1998 .

[36]  Joost C. F. de Winter,et al.  A Review and Framework of Control Authority Transitions in Automated Driving , 2015 .

[37]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  How Traffic Situations and Non-Driving Related Tasks Affect the Take-Over Quality in Highly Automated Driving , 2014 .

[38]  D. de Waard,et al.  Handbook of driving simulation for engineering, medicine and psychology , 2011 .

[39]  Katja Kircher,et al.  Tactical Driving Behavior With Different Levels of Automation , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[40]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  A transforming steering wheel for highly automated cars , 2015, 2015 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV).

[41]  D. Swaroop,et al.  A review of constant time headway policy for automatic vehicle following , 2001, ITSC 2001. 2001 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems. Proceedings (Cat. No.01TH8585).

[42]  Neville A Stanton,et al.  Driver behaviour with adaptive cruise control , 2005, Ergonomics.

[43]  Wendy Ju,et al.  Emergency, Automation Off: Unstructured Transition Timing for Distracted Drivers of Automated Vehicles , 2015, 2015 IEEE 18th International Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[44]  Robert Gray,et al.  A Comparison of Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Warnings for Rear-End Collision Prevention in Simulated Driving , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[45]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Human Factors in Automotive Engineering and Technology , 2017 .

[46]  John A. Michon,et al.  A critical view of driver behavior models: What do we know , 1985 .

[47]  Lutz Lorenz,et al.  Designing take over scenarios for automated driving , 2014 .

[48]  Alexander Eriksson,et al.  Can User-Paced, Menu-free Spoken Language Interfaces Improve Dual Task Handling While Driving? , 2014, HCI.

[49]  Jeroen Hogema,et al.  Automated Driving Functions Giving Control Back to the Driver: A Simulator Study on Driver State Dependent Strategies , 2015 .

[50]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  The influence of age on the take-over of vehicle control in highly automated driving , 2016 .

[51]  Niklas Strand,et al.  Semi-automated versus highly automated driving in critical situations caused by automation failures , 2014 .

[52]  Keith Case,et al.  ‘Beyond Jack and Jill’: designing for individuals using HADRIAN , 2004 .

[53]  C.A.G. Belderbos Authority Transition Interface: A Human Machine Interface for Taking over Control from a Highly Automated Truck , 2015 .

[54]  Mia Hubert,et al.  LIBRA: a MATLAB library for robust analysis , 2005 .

[55]  Peter T. Martin,et al.  An Investigation of Driver Distraction Near the Tipping Point of Traffic Flow Stability , 2009, Hum. Factors.

[56]  Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles , 2022 .

[57]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Monitoring an Automated System for a Single Failure: Vigilance and Task Complexity Effects , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[58]  Victoria A Banks,et al.  Contrasting models of driver behaviour in emergencies using retrospective verbalisations and network analysis , 2015, Ergonomics.

[59]  Mark S. Young,et al.  Malleable Attentional Resources Theory: A New Explanation for the Effects of Mental Underload on Performance , 2002, Hum. Factors.

[60]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  AUTOMATING THE DRIVER'S CONTROL TASKS , 2001 .

[61]  Alexandra Neukum,et al.  The effect of urgency of take-over requests during highly automated driving under distraction conditions , 2014 .