Bayesian Highest Density Intervals of Take-Over Times for Highly Automated Driving in Different Traffic Densities

Current human factors research on automated driving aims to ensure its safe introduction into road traffic. Although informative results are crucial for this purpose, most studies rely on point estimates and dichotomous reject-nonreject decisions that have been declared obsolete by more recent statistical approaches like new statistics (Cumming, 2014) or Bayesian parameter estimation (Kruschke, 2015). In this work, we show the objective advantages of Bayesian parameter estimation and demonstrate its abundance of information on parameters. In Study 1, we estimate take-over times with a relatively uninformed prior distribution. In Study 2, the resulting posterior distributions of Study 1 were then used as informed prior distributions for interval estimations of mean, standard deviation and distribution shape of take-over time in different traffic densities. We obtained 95 % credible interval widths between 490 ms and 600 ms for mean take-over times, depending on the condition. These intervals include the 95 % most probable values of the mean take-over time and represent a quantification of uncertainty in the estimation. Given the data and the experimental conditions, a take-over requires most likely 2.51 seconds [2.27, 2.76] when there is no traffic, 3.40 seconds [3.11, 3.71] in medium traffic and 3.50 seconds [3.21, 3.78] in high traffic. Bayesian model comparison with Bayes Factor is discussed as an alternative approach in conclusion.

[1]  Felix D. Schönbrodt,et al.  Sequential Hypothesis Testing With Bayes Factors: Efficiently Testing Mean Differences , 2017, Psychological methods.

[2]  L. Harlow,et al.  What if there were no significance tests , 1997 .

[3]  Rex B. Kline,et al.  Beyond Significance Testing: Statistics Reform in the Behavioral Sciences , 2013 .

[4]  Eduard Brandstätter,et al.  Confidence Intervals as an Alternative to Significance Testing , 1999 .

[5]  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.

[6]  G. Cumming The New Statistics: Why and How , 2013 .

[7]  Fiona Fidler,et al.  The statistical recommendations of the American Psychological Association Publication Manual: Effect sizes, confidence intervals, and meta‐analysis , 2012 .

[8]  John K. Kruschke,et al.  Doing Bayesian Data Analysis: A Tutorial with R, JAGS, and Stan , 2014 .

[9]  G. Cumming,et al.  Confidence intervals : better answers to better questions. , 2009 .

[10]  G. Cumming,et al.  A Primer on the Understanding, Use, and Calculation of Confidence Intervals that are Based on Central and Noncentral Distributions , 2001 .

[11]  Ying Wang,et al.  The Impact of Systematic Variation of Cognitive Demand on Drivers' Visual Attention across Multiple Age Groups , 2010 .

[12]  Wim Van Den Noortgate,et al.  Students’ misconceptions of statistical inference: A review of the empirical evidence from research on statistics education , 2007 .

[13]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  John K Kruschke,et al.  Bayesian Assessment of Null Values Via Parameter Estimation and Model Comparison , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[15]  John K. Kruschke,et al.  The Time Has Come : Bayesian Methods for Data Analysis in the Organizational Sciences , 2012 .

[16]  Riender Happee,et al.  Public opinion on automated driving: results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents , 2015 .

[17]  Michael Smithson,et al.  Doing Bayesian Data Analysis: A Tutorial with R and BUGS, J.J. Kruschke. Academic Press (2011), 653, $89.95Reviewed by Michael Smithson, ISBN: 9780123814852 , 2011 .

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

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

[20]  John K. Kruschke,et al.  The Bayesian New Statistics: Two historical trends converge , 2015 .

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

[22]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  Taking Over Control from Highly Automated Vehicles , 2014 .

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

[24]  Klaus Bengler,et al.  Potential Individual Differences Regarding Automation Effects in Automated Driving , 2014, Interacción '14.

[25]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  The fallacy of placing confidence in confidence intervals , 2015, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[26]  Martyn Plummer,et al.  JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling , 2003 .