Abstract
The absence of a human driver in an automated vehicle (AV) raises new challenges in communication and cooperation between road users, especially for ambiguous situations where road users would like to communicate their intention explicitly. This paper investigates the effect of a novel external human-machine interface (eHMI) which was designed to address this issue by signaling the AV’s intention through a 360° LED light-band mounted outside of the AV. In a simulator study an eHMI interaction strategy was implemented that should convey the message “I am giving way” to a manually driven vehicle operated by participants waiting at a t-junction. The experimental study incorporated three t-junction scenarios where the AV had always the right of way but may yield to a driver waiting at the intersection. The intention of the AV was communicated either implicitly (braking) or implicitly and explicitly (braking and eHMI). It was analyzed whether participants would understand the AV’s intention and accept the gap provided in front of the AV. Through participants’ subjective ratings the understandability, the usability and the acceptance of the eHMI solution were evaluated. The results showed that the majority of participants (85%) understood the meaning of the eHMI signal after two interactions. Initial gap acceptance results showed a positive effect of the eHMI solution. The presence of an eHMI improved participants perceived safety and trust. Subjective ratings for usability and acceptance indicated that participants perceived this eHMI interaction strategy as easy to use and were willing to communicate with an AV in this way. The results of the present study will be used to investigate the beneficial impact of this eHMI interaction strategy further in more complex traffic scenarios.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
On-Road Automated Driving (ORAD) Committee: Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to Driving Automation Systems for On-Road Motor Vehicles (2021). https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_202104/
Bansal, P., Kockelman, K.M.: Forecasting Americans’ long-term adoption of connected and autonomous vehicle technologies. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 95, 49–63 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2016.10.013
Fuest, T., Sorokin, L., Bellem, H., Bengler, K.: Taxonomy of traffic situations for the interaction between automated vehicles and human road users. In: Stanton, N.A. (ed.) AHFE 2017. AISC, vol. 597, pp. 708–719. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60441-1_68
Dey, D., Habibovic, A., Löcken, A., et al.: Taming the eHMI jungle: a classification taxonomy to guide, compare, and assess the design principles of automated vehicles’ external human-machine interfaces. Transp. Res. Interdisc. Perspect. 7, 100174 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100174
Mahadevan, K., Somanath, S., Sharlin, E.: Communicating awareness and intent in autonomous vehicle-pedestrian interaction. In: Mandryk, R., Hancock, M., Perry, M., et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2018)
Merat, N., Louw, T., Madigan, R., et al.: What externally presented information do VRUs require when interacting with fully Automated Road Transport Systems in shared space? Accid. Anal. Prev. 118, 244–252 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2018.03.018
Lee, Y.M., Madigan, R., Garcia, J., et al.: Understanding the messages conveyed by automated vehicles. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, pp. 134–143. Association for Computing Machinery, New York (2019)
Madigan, R.: interACT D.6.3. Impact assessment of the new interaction strategies on traffic cooperation, traffic flow, infrastructure design and road safety (2020). https://www.interact-roadautomation.eu/wp-content/uploads/interACT D6.3_v1.0_FinalWebsite.pdf
Schieben, A.: Designing cooperative interaction of automated vehicles with other road users in mixed traffic environment (2017). https://www.interact-roadautomation.eu/. Accessed 20 Mar 2021
Weber, F.: interACT D4.2 Final interaction strategies for the interACT Automated Vehicles (2019)
Fischer, M., Richter, A., Schindler, J., et al.: Modular and scalable driving simulator hardware and software for the development of future driver assistence and automation systems. In: New Developments in Driving Simulation Design and Experiments, pp. 223–229 (2014)
Fitzpatrick, K.: Gaps accepted at stop-controlled intersections (1991)
Wilbrink, M.: interACT D1.1 definition of interACT use cases and scenarios (2018). https://www.interact-roadautomation.eu/wp-content/uploads/interACT_WP1_D1.1_UseCases_Scenarios_1.1_approved_UploadWebsite.pdf
Brooke, J.: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B.A, McClelland, A.L. (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry. Taylor, London (1996)
van der Laan, J.D., Heino, A., de Waard, D.: A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transp. Res. Part C Emerg. Technol. 5, 1–10 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0968-090X(96)00025-3
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M.G., Davis, G.B.: User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27, 425 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540
Franke, T., Attig, C., Wessel, D.: A personal resource for technology interaction: development and validation of the affinity for technology interaction (ATI) scale. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 35, 456–467 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150
Sauro, J.: Measuring usability with the system usability scale (SUS) (2011). https://measuringu.com/sus/. Accessed 07 Mar 2021
Lewis, J.R., Sauro, J.: The factor structure of the system usability scale. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5619, pp. 94–103. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02806-9_12
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Avsar, H., Utesch, F., Wilbrink, M., Oehl, M., Schießl, C. (2021). Efficient Communication of Automated Vehicles and Manually Driven Vehicles Through an External Human-Machine Interface (eHMI): Evaluation at T-Junctions. In: Stephanidis, C., Antona, M., Ntoa, S. (eds) HCI International 2021 - Posters. HCII 2021. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1421. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78645-8_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78645-8_28
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-78644-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-78645-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)