Defining A Design Space of The Auto-Mobile Office: A Computational Abstraction Hierarchy Analysis

One advantage of highly automated vehicles is drivers can use commute time for non-driving tasks, such as work-related tasks. The potential for an auto-mobile office—a space where drivers work in automated vehicles—is a complex yet underexplored idea. This paper begins to define a design space of the auto- mobile office in SAE Level 3 automated vehicles by integrating the affinity diagram (AD) with a computational representation of the abstraction hierarchy (AH). The AD uses a bottom-up approach where researchers starting with individual findings aggregate and abstract those into higher-level concepts. The AH uses a top-down approach where researchers start with first principles to identify means-ends links between system goals and concrete forms of the system. Using the programming language R, the means-ends links of AH can be explored statistically. This computational approach to the AH provides a systematic means to define the design space of the auto-mobile office.

[1]  Roope Raisamo,et al.  Unimodal and Multimodal Signals to Support Control Transitions in Semiautonomous Vehicles , 2019, AutomotiveUI.

[2]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decisionmaking and system management , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[3]  A Data Analytics Approach to Persona Development for The Future Mobile Office , 2020 .

[4]  Michael Hahsler,et al.  Getting Things in Order: An Introduction to the R Package seriation , 2008 .

[5]  Guy H. Walker,et al.  Using the abstraction hierarchy to identify how the purpose and structure of road transport systems contributes to road trauma , 2019 .

[6]  Neville A. Stanton,et al.  Work domain analysis and intelligent transport systems: Implications for vehicle design , 2007 .

[7]  Ravi S. Behara,et al.  Mapping product usability , 2002 .

[8]  Linda Ng Boyle,et al.  Exploring the concept of the (future) mobile office , 2019, AutomotiveUI.

[9]  Morten Lind,et al.  Making sense of the abstraction hierarchy in the power plant domain , 2003, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[10]  Karen Holtzblatt,et al.  Contextual design , 1997, INTR.

[11]  Patrick A. Singleton,et al.  Discussing the “positive utilities” of autonomous vehicles: will travellers really use their time productively? , 2019 .

[12]  Albrecht Schmidt,et al.  Shifting Gears: User Interfaces in the Age of Autonomous Driving , 2016, IEEE Pervasive Computing.

[13]  Daniel Howard.  Public Perceptions of Self-driving Cars: , 2014 .

[14]  X. Jessie Yang,et al.  From Manual Driving to Automated Driving: A Review of 10 Years of AutoUI , 2019, AutomotiveUI.

[15]  Mexhid Ferati,et al.  Universal Design of User Interfaces in Self-driving Cars , 2017 .

[16]  John P. Robinson,et al.  Measures Of Personality And Social Psychological Attitudes , 1991 .

[17]  C. Burns,et al.  Lessons From a Comparison of Work Domain Models: Representational Choices and Their Implications , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[18]  Dal Vernon C. Reising.  The Abstraction Hierarchy and its Extension beyond Process Control , 2000 .

[19]  Frank E. Pollick,et al.  Language-based multimodal displays for the handover of control in autonomous cars , 2015, AutomotiveUI.

[20]  Thomas P. Moran,et al.  Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis , 1991, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[21]  Kim J. Vicente,et al.  Making the abstraction hierarchy concrete , 1994, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[22]  Giulio Di Gravio,et al.  Defining the functional resonance analysis space: Combining Abstraction Hierarchy and FRAM , 2017, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[23]  Andrés Lucero,et al.  Using Affinity Diagrams to Evaluate Interactive Prototypes , 2015, INTERACT.