A critique of the SAE conditional driving automation definition, and analyses of options for improvement

The Society of Automotive Engineers defines five levels of driving automation (LoDA) (plus a “no-automation” level 0). Among them, the third level, called “conditional driving automation,” here denoted LoDA 3, performs the complete dynamic driving task (DDT) within a limited operational domain. Although the driver is free from any driving task while the automation is engaged, she is expected to be receptive to an automation-issued request to intervene (RTI) and is also expected to perform DDT fallback in a timely manner. This paper gives a method to derive an optimal design for RTI and proves that LoDA 3 coupled with the optimal RTI should never be simply called “conditional driving automation.” This means that the definition of LoDA 3 is not complete and that at least one important level is missing in the list for LoDAs. This paper provides two ways to resolve the problem.

[1]  Makoto Itoh,et al.  Trust, Self-Confidence and Authority in Human-Machine Systems , 1998 .

[2]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[3]  Mats Winroth,et al.  Aligning manufacturing strategy and levels of automation: A case study , 2010 .

[4]  Charles E. Billings,et al.  Aviation Automation: The Search for A Human-centered Approach , 1996 .

[5]  Frank Flemisch,et al.  Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations , 2012, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[6]  N. Moray,et al.  Adaptive automation, trust, and self-confidence in fault management of time-critical tasks. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[7]  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.

[8]  Frédéric Vanderhaegen,et al.  Levels of automation and human-machine cooperation: Application to human-robot interaction , 2011 .

[9]  Mark Mulder,et al.  Haptic shared control: smoothly shifting control authority? , 2012, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[10]  Riender Happee,et al.  Take-over performance in evasive manoeuvres. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[11]  Toshiyuki Inagaki,et al.  Authority and responsibility in human–machine systems: probability theoretic validation of machine-initiated trading of authority , 2011, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[12]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Telerobotics, Automation, and Human Supervisory Control , 2003 .

[13]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Human Supervisory Control , 2012 .

[14]  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.

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

[16]  Takahiro Saito,et al.  Authority transfer method from automated to manual driving via haptic shared control , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC).

[17]  Toshiyuki Inagaki,et al.  Adaptive choice of a safety management scheme upon an alarm under supervisory control of a large-complex system , 1993 .

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

[19]  Mark W. Scerbo,et al.  Adaptive Automation , 2006, Neuroergonomics.

[20]  Toshiyuki Inagaki,et al.  Situation-Adaptive Responsibility Allocation for Human-Centered Automation , 1995 .

[21]  Yung-Tsan Jou,et al.  Evaluation of operators’ mental workload of human–system interface automation in the advanced nuclear power plants , 2009 .

[22]  Toshiyuki Inagaki,et al.  Adaptive Automation: Sharing and Trading of Control , 2001 .

[23]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Human and Computer Control of Undersea Teleoperators , 1978 .

[24]  Riender Happee,et al.  Human factors of transitions in automated driving: A general framework and literature survey , 2016 .

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

[26]  Alex M. Andrew,et al.  Humans and Automation: System Design and Research Issues , 2003 .

[27]  David B. Kaber,et al.  The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task , 2004 .

[28]  J C F de Winter,et al.  Comparing spatially static and dynamic vibrotactile take-over requests in the driver seat. , 2017, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[29]  Makoto Itoh,et al.  Support by Warning or by Action: Which is Appropriate under Mismatches between Driver Intent and Traffic Conditions? , 2007, IEICE Trans. Fundam. Electron. Commun. Comput. Sci..