Advertisement

Towards User-Centred Development of Integrated Information, Warning, and Intervention Strategies for Multiple ADAS in the EU Project interactIVe

  • Tobias Hesse
  • Johan Engström
  • Emma Johansson
  • Giuseppe Varalda
  • Martin Brockmann
  • Amon Rambaldini
  • Nicola Fricke
  • Frank Flemisch
  • Frank Köster
  • Lena Kanstrup
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6767)

Abstract

In the increasingly fast strive for new advanced driver assistance systems and a continuously higher automation of the driving task, it is essential not to lose sight of the most important factor: the driver. Therefore, we have to develop interaction strategies that center around the user perspective without loosing sight of the technological availability. Individual design for a certain assistance function must be balanced with the integrated and compatible design of multiple functions in several vehicles. This paper details the iterative interactIVe approach and details how the strategy space was structured to find possible common elements, derive generic interaction strategies universal to several or all systems, and identify the main research questions for the further course of the project.

Keywords

human-machine interaction balanced design user-centered design interaction strategies highly automated driving active safety systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Löper, C., Kelsch, J., Flemisch, F.: Kooperative, manöverbasierte automation und arbitrierung als bausteine für hochautomatisiertes fahren. In: AAET 2008-Automatisierungssysteme, Assistenzsysteme und eingebettete Systeme für Transportmittel, pp. 215–237 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boehm, B.: A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Computer 21, 61–72 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Flemisch, F., Griesche, S., Heesen, M., Kaussner, A., Niemann, J., Petermann, I., Schieben, A., Schoemig, N.: HAVEit Deliverable D33.3 - Validation of preliminary design by simulation (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ljung Aust, M., Engström, J.: A conceptual framework for requirement specification and evaluation of active safety functions. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science (2010), First published on June 15, 2010 (iFirst)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    ETAC: A scientific study ”etac” european truck accident causation. full report. Technical report, International Road Transport Union/European Commission (2007) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bødker: Creating conditions for participation: Conflicts and resources in systems design. Human Computer Interaction 11, 215–236 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stankiewicz, R.: The concept of design space, technological innovation as an evolutionary process, pp. 43–46. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sarter, N.: Investigating mode errors on automated flight decks: Illustrating the problem-driven, cumulative, and interdisciplinary nature of human factors research. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50, 506–510 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Billings, E.: Aviation automation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahwah (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wheeler, P.: Aspects of automation: mode confusion. Master’s thesis, University of Massachusetts (2007) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Degani, A., Shafto, M., Kirlik, A.: Modes in automated cockpits: Problems, data analysis and a modelling framework. In: Proceedings of the 36th Israel Annual Conference on Aerospace Sciences, Haifa, Israel, pp. 258–266 (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Norman, D.: Some observations on mentai modeis. Mental Models 7 (1983)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ho, C., Reed, N., Spence, C.: Multisensory in-car warning signals for collision avoidance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49, 1107–1114 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fitch, G., Kiefer, R., Hankey, J., Kleiner, B.: Toward developing an approach for alerting drivers to the direction of a crash threat. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49, 710–720 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    ISO15624: Transport information and control systems – traffic impediment warning systems (tiws) – system requirements (2001) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Endsley, M.: Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37, 32–64 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schieben, A., Heesen, M., Schindler, J., Kelsch, J., Flemisch, F.: The theater-system technique: Agile designing and testing of system behavior and interaction, applied to highly automated vehicles. In: AutomotiveUI 2009, Essen, Germany, September 21-22, 2009. ACM, New York, 978-1-60558-571-0/09/009Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tobias Hesse
    • 1
  • Johan Engström
    • 1
  • Emma Johansson
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Varalda
    • 1
  • Martin Brockmann
    • 1
  • Amon Rambaldini
    • 1
  • Nicola Fricke
    • 1
  • Frank Flemisch
    • 1
  • Frank Köster
    • 1
  • Lena Kanstrup
    • 1
  1. 1.German Aerospace Center (DLR)Institute of Transportation SystemsBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations