Evaluation of semi‐autonomous convoy driving

Autonomous mobility technologies may have applications to manned vehicle convoy operations—they have the ability to enhance both system performance and operator capability. This effort examines the potential impact of introducing semi-autonomous mobility [Convoy Active Safety Technologies (CAST)] into manned vehicles. Twelve civilians with experience driving military vehicles in convoy-type operations participated in this experiment. For the experiment, they were tasked with following a lead vehicle while completing a concurrent security task (scanning the local environment for targets). The control of the manned vehicle was varied between CAST and manual control at several different speed levels. Several objective speed and accuracy variables along with subjective operator assessment variables were examined for each task. The results support the potential benefits of incorporating semi-autonomous mobility technologies into manned vehicle convoy operations. The semi-autonomous mobility system was associated with significantly better performance in several aspects of operator situational awareness and convoy integrity, including enhanced target identification, improved maintenance of following distance, and improved performance for unanticipated stops. This experiment also highlighted a critical human factors issue associated with the incorporation of autonomy in real-world applications: participants felt that, overall, they

[1]  Dariu Gavrila,et al.  The Issues , 2011 .

[2]  Kaleb McDowell,et al.  Secure Mobility and the Autonomous Driver , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[3]  Petros A. Ioannou,et al.  Autonomous intelligent cruise control , 1993 .

[4]  Dean A. Pomerleau,et al.  Vision guided lane transition , 1995, Proceedings of the Intelligent Vehicles '95. Symposium.

[5]  Ming Xie,et al.  Vision-guided automatic parking for smart car , 2000, Proceedings of the IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium 2000 (Cat. No.00TH8511).

[6]  Azim Eskandarian,et al.  Research advances in intelligent collision avoidance and adaptive cruise control , 2003, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst..

[7]  A. Zinsmeister,et al.  A questionnaire for the assessment of biliary symptoms , 2003, American Journal of Gastroenterology.

[8]  Joshua P. Switkes,et al.  EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF THE POTENTIAL FIELD LANEKEEPING SYSTEM , 2004 .

[9]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Structure of Attentional Resources , 1980 .

[10]  N Moray,et al.  Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. , 1992, Ergonomics.

[11]  Mark S. Young,et al.  Automotive automation: Investigating the impact on drivers' mental workload , 1997 .

[12]  P. Fitts.  The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[13]  Neville A Stanton,et al.  Taking the load off: investigations of how adaptive cruise control affects mental workload , 2004, Ergonomics.

[14]  E. Muth,et al.  A questionnaire for the assessment of the multiple dimensions of motion sickness. , 2001, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[15]  E D Dickmanns,et al.  GUIDING LAND VEHICLES ALONG ROADWAYS BY COMPUTER VISION , 1985 .

[16]  Avshalom Suissa,et al.  The Daimler-Benz steering assistant: a spin-off from autonomous driving , 1994, Proceedings of the Intelligent Vehicles '94 Symposium.

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

[18]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Validating human-robot interaction schemes in multitasking environments , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[19]  J. C. Gerdes,et al.  Modification of vehicle handling characteristics via steer-by-wire , 2003, Proceedings of the 2003 American Control Conference, 2003..

[20]  V. Venkatesh,et al.  AGE DIFFERENCES IN TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION DECISIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR A CHANGING WORK FORCE , 2000 .

[21]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Human vs. Automation in Responding to Failures: An Expected-Value Analysis , 2000 .

[22]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[23]  Jürgen Ackermann,et al.  Yaw disturbance attenuation by robust decoupling of car steering , 1996 .

[24]  Charneta Samms,et al.  Trade Study: A Two- Versus Three-Soldier Crew for the Mounted Combat System (MCS) and Other Future Combat System Platforms , 2003 .

[25]  Mark S. Young,et al.  Vehicle automation and driving performance , 1998 .

[26]  Johan Bengtsson,et al.  Adaptive Cruise Control and Driver Modeling , 2001 .

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

[28]  S. Glaser,et al.  On the use of steer-by-wire systems in lateral driving assistance applications , 2001, Proceedings 10th IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. ROMAN 2001 (Cat. No.01TH8591).

[29]  Colin G. Drury,et al.  Foundations for an Empirically Determined Scale of Trust in Automated Systems , 2000 .