Remote driving operations represents an area of growing promise to exercise human driving capability rather than replace it. Autonomous driving technology is often motivated towards removing humans from the control loop of driving but up to now, has not been able to fully realize such aims. This paper summarizes two experiments that were conducted to investigate viability aspects of emulated teledriving from the point of view of a teledriver and of telepassengers. In the first experiment, a test driver improved lateral lane conformance across a closed-course track after only a few laps while experiencing novel arrangements of live-filmed driving camera and display views. In the second experiment, acceptance ratings from online survey respondents showed prominent negative scores only after viewing simulated driving videos with up to 20x to 50x the steering angle error of a modeled tele-steering device. Together, these studies suggest plausibility for teledriving and promise for future human factors research in this area.
CabrallC.D.D.SheridanT.B.PrevotT.de WinterJ.C.F.HappeeR. (2018). The 4D LINT model of function allocation: Spatial-temporal arrangement and levels of automation. Proceedings of the 1stInternational Conference on Intelligent Human Systems Integration (IHSI): Integrating People and Intelligent Systems, in KarwowskiW.AhramT. (eds.). Cham, Switzerland: Springer, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (AISC), 722, pp. 29-34
3.
ChucholowskiF.SauerM.LienkampM. (2013). Evaluation of display methods for teleoperation of road vehicles. In: ICIUS 2013: 9thInternational Conference on Intelligent Unmanned Systems.
4.
EndsleyM.JonesD.G. (2012). Chp. 12. Unmanned and remotely operated vehicles. In Designing for Situation Awareness: An Approach to User-Centered Design, second edition. Boca Raton, Florida, USA: CRC Press. pp.219-233
5.
FavaroF.EurichS.NaderN. (2018). Autonomous vehicles’ disengagements: Trends, triggers, and regulatory limitations. Accident Anslysis and Prevention, 100, pp. 136-148
ForkenbrockG.J.ElsasserD. (2005). An assessment of human driver steering capability. NHTSA, Report no. DOT-HS-809-875
8.
FranklinG.F.PowellJ.D.Emami-NaeiniA. (2014). Feedback control of dynamic systems (7th edition). London: Pearson Education Limited
9.
GnatzigS.ChucholowskiF.TangT.LienkampM. (2013). A system design for teleoperated road vehicles. Proceedings of the 10thInternational Conference on Informatics in Control, Automation and Robotics ICINCO2013, vol. 2, pp. 231-238.
10.
GnatzigS.SchullerF.LienkampM. (2012). Human-machine interaction as a key technology for driverless driving – A trajectory-based shared autonomy control approach. 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21stIEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. Paris, France.
11.
HancockP.A.SheridanT.B. (2011). The future of driving simulation. In FisherD.L.RizzoM.CairdJ.LeeJ.D. (eds.). Handbook of Driving Simulation for Engineering, Medicine, and Psychology. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press. pp. 4.1-4.11
12.
HosseiniA.LienkampM. (2016a). Enhancing telepresence during the teleoperation of road vehicles using HMD-based mixed reality. In Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2016IEEE, pp. 1366-1373
13.
HosseiniA.LienkampM. (2016b). Predictive safety based on track before-detect for teleoperated driving through communication time delay. 2016 IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), Gothenburg, Sweden, June 19-22
14.
ItoT.A.LarsenJ.T.SmithN.K.CacioppoJ.T. (1998). Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(4), pp. 887-900
15.
KalraN.PaddockS.M. (2016). Driving to safety: How many miles of driving would it take to demonstrate autonomous vehicle reliability?Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 94, pp. 182-193
16.
KennedeyR.S.LaneN.E.BerbaumK.S.LilienthalM.G. (1993). Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(3), pp. 203-220.
17.
LiuR.KwakD.DevarakonaS.BekrisK.IftodeL. (2017). Investigating remote driving over the LTE network. Automotive User Interfaces, Oldenburg, Germany, September24-27
SAE (2014). Surface vehicle information report: Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to on-road motor vehicle automation driving systems. Standard J3016. On-Road Automated Vehicles Standards Committee, SAE International. From: https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201401/
21.
SAE (2018). Surface vehicle recommended practice: Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles. Standard J3016. On-Road Automated Vehicles Standards Committee, SAE International. From: https://www.sae.org/standards/content/j3016_201806/
22.
SheridanT.B. (2016). Recollections on Presence beginnings, and some challenges for augmented and virtual reality. Presence, 25(1), pp. 75-77.
23.
SmithM.R.WittG.L.BakowskiD.L. (2007). The application of real time distraction monitoring to driver safety systems. NHTSA Human Factors forum. Washington DC.
24.
TaylorS.E. (1991). Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization-minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110, p. 67-85
25.
UchidaN.TagawaT.SatoK. (2015). Development of an instrumented vehicle with Augmented Reality (AR) for driver performance evaluation. FAST-zero Symposium. Gothenburg, Sweden.
26.
Van der LaanJ.D.HeinoA.de WaardD. (1997). A simple procedure for the assessment of acceptance of advanced transport telematics. Transportation Research part C: Emerging Technologies, 5, pp. 1-10. From: https://www.hfes-europe.org/accept/accept.htm
