1 / 17

Assessing the Safety of Infotainment Systems Used While Driving: Practical Lessons from InfoMan Paul Green & Norima

Assessing the Safety of Infotainment Systems Used While Driving: Practical Lessons from InfoMan Paul Green & Norimasa Kishi University of Michigan UMTRI Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2150 USA Pagreen@umich.edu www.umich.edu/~driving Nissan Motor Company Nissan Research Center

oshin
Download Presentation

Assessing the Safety of Infotainment Systems Used While Driving: Practical Lessons from InfoMan Paul Green & Norima

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Assessing the Safety of Infotainment Systems Used While Driving: Practical Lessons from InfoMan Paul Green & Norimasa Kishi University of Michigan UMTRI Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-2150 USA Pagreen@umich.edu www.umich.edu/~driving Nissan Motor Company Nissan Research Center Yokosuka, Kanagawa 237-8523, Japan n-kishi@mail.nissan.co.jp

  2. InfoMan (Information Manager) * Workload manager conceived and developed by Nissan * Proprietary workload algorithm * UMTRI provided a background literature review to support its development * UMTRI was a collaborator in its evaluation

  3. What Did We Do? - Issues • Experiment 1 (on the road, 2002 Q45): • 1. Can an information manager reduce the risk of driving? • 2. How can the Nissan workload metric be improved? • Experiment 2 (DriveSafety driving simulator): • What is the relationship between menu depth & primary task demand? • 2. Is PDT sensitive to workload? • 3. How do the real and simulated results compare?

  4. What Did We Do? - Driver Tasks Hypothetical 4 /level & real interfaces * Example 3 step “Set the navigation heading to north up.” * Example 6 step “Set the map background display to bright.”

  5. Simulated (Exp. 2) Real (Exp. 1) Arterial Downtown Rural M-14 (xway) US-23 (xway) Arterial Downtown Rural M-14 (xway) US-23 (xway)

  6. Lesson 1 - Simulated Roads It is extremely difficult to match real roads using the current version of the DriveSafety software due to the tile architecture. * No 2 lane/direction expressways * Many missing x-way interchanges * No pipe bridges for signs (landmarks) * No easy way to add landmark buildings

  7. Specific Workload Roads - Experiment 2

  8. Lesson 2 - Test Roads • For large individual differences (e.g., young vs. old), variable length road sections are needed. • --> multiple out and back (return) points • --> hard to assemble consistent, multi-road sequence • 2. Many driving studies occur in the spring/summer construction season. Get the schedules. • 3. Because of traffic, data collection time-outs are needed. • 4. Obtaining consistent data in urban areas is much more difficult than the open road, the typical case in the U.S.

  9. Lesson 3 - Dep. Measures - New Scale Risk Driving Performance Menu Task Peripheral Detection Task Rating ** important! SD of steering wheel angle SD lane position (sim only) Headway (time and distance) SD headway (sim only) Mean speed Speed drops (sim only) Completion time Response time Fraction of detected signals

  10. Lesson 3 - New Rating Scale Most use TLX to rate task workload/difficulty - well researched - used by driving researchers - has NASA name But… Risk .ne. workload Difficult to relate TLX to driving dimensions (road geometry, traffic, etc.) Drivers need contextual anchors for rating - range of ratings is uncertain -> range compression - drivers forget what things were -> inconsistency

  11. Rating, As Risky As... 10. Driving with my eyes closed. A crash will occur every time 9. Pass a school bus: red lights flashing & the stop arm out 8. Driving just under the legal alcohol limit with observed weaving 7. 6. Driving 20 miles an hour faster than traffic on an expressway 5. 4. Driving 10 miles an hour faster than traffic on an expressway 3. 2. Driving on an average road under average conditions 1. Driving on an easy road with no traffic, pedestrians, or animals while perfectly alert (UMTRI Scale)

  12. Lesson 3 - UMTRI Risk Scale Calibration Extremely somewhat neither safe somewhat extremelysafe safe nor unsafe unsafe unsafe 1. Drive on an average road under average conditions 2. Drive through a stop sign without slowing down … 6. Driving today: Perform a short task while driving on the hwy 7. Driving today: Perform a long task while driving on the hwy * Mark the risk ratings you gave while driving (e.g., a “2”). * Below what value would you perform a non-urgent task? * Above what value would you never perform in-vehicle tasks?

  13. Lesson 3 - Key Points About Ratings Most ratings are 2-6, so most ratings are relative to speed (unidimensional). * crash prob. versus excess speed (for x-ways) -> fatalities (“How many people will die” question.) Normalize to what is acceptable for each driver so between driver comparisons are consistent. (Different drivers have different acceptance levels for excess speed.) Post-test ratings (each task length (none, 3, 6 steps), each road type) were well correlated with ratings while driving. (-> reliable)

  14. Example Results from Risk Ratings 20% short tasks, 40% long tasks > individual safety thresholds

  15. References Project reports to appear, see www.umich.edu/~driving Tsimhoni, Smith, and Green, (2003). On-the-Road Assessment of Driving Workload and Risk to Support the Development of an Information Manager (Technical Report UMTRI-2003-08) Tsimhoni, Smith, and Green, (2003). The Effect of In-Vehicle Task Menu Depth and Driving Workload on Task and Driving Performance (Technical Report UMTRI-2003-09) Risk Rating Boyle, Dienstfrey, and Sothoron (1998). National Survey of Speeding and Other Unsafe Driving Actions (NHTSA report)

  16. “Driver” Distraction

More Related