Search for: All records

Objective This study develops a computational model to predict drivers’ response time and understand the underlying cognitive mechanism for freeway exiting takeovers in conditionally automated vehicles (AVs). Background Previous research has modeled drivers’ takeover response time in emergency scenarios that demand a quick response. However, existing models may not be applicable for scheduled, non-time-critical takeovers as drivers take longer to resume control when there is no time pressure. A model of driver response time in non-time-critical takeovers is lacking. Method A computational cognitive model of driver takeover response time is developed based on Queuing Network-Model Human Processor (QN-MHP) architecture. The model quantifies gaze redirection in response to takeover request (ToR), task prioritization, driver situation awareness, and driver trust to address the complexities of drivers' takeover strategies when sufficient time budget exists. Results Experimental data of a preliminary driving simulator study were used to validate the model. The model accounted for 97% of the experimental takeover response time for freeway exiting. Conclusion The current model can successfully predict drivers’ response time for scheduled, non-time-critical freeway exiting takeovers in conditionally AVs. Application This model can be applied to the human-machine interface design with respect to ToR lead time for enhancing safe freeway exiting takeovers in conditionally AVs. It also provides a foundation for future modeling work towards an integrated driver model of freeway exiting takeover performance. 

Conditionally automated vehicles require the out-of-the-loop driver to intervene when the system is unable to handle forthcoming situations, such as freeway exiting. The takeover request (ToR) for exiting a freeway can be scheduled in advance. Upon a ToR, the driver needs to gain situation awareness (SA) and resume manual control. This study examined how the ToR lead time affects driver SA for resuming control and when to send the ToR is most appropriate for freeway exiting. A web-based, supervised experiment was conducted with 31 participants. Each participant experienced 12 levels of ToR lead time (6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 25, 30, 45, and 60 s). The results showed positive effects of longer ToR lead times (16–60 s) on driver SA for resuming control to exit from freeways in comparison to shorter ToR lead times (6–14 s), and the effects level off at 16–30 s.