What Is the Gaze Behavior of Pedestrians in Interactions with an Automated Vehicle When They Do Not Understand Its Intentions?
January 06, 2020 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International journal of human computer interactions
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Hailong Liu, Takatsugu Hirayama, Luis Yoichi Morales, Hiroshi Murase
arXiv ID
2001.01340
Category
cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction
Citations
25
Venue
International journal of human computer interactions
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Interactions between pedestrians and automated vehicles (AVs) will increase significantly with the popularity of AV. However, pedestrians often have not enough trust on the AVs , particularly when they are confused about an AV's intention in a interaction. This study seeks to evaluate if pedestrians clearly understand the driving intentions of AVs in interactions and presents experimental research on the relationship between gaze behaviors of pedestrians and their understanding of the intentions of the AV. The hypothesis investigated in this study was that the less the pedestrian understands the driving intentions of the AV, the longer the duration of their gazing behavior will be. A pedestrian--vehicle interaction experiment was designed to verify the proposed hypothesis. A robotic wheelchair was used as the manual driving vehicle (MV) and AV for interacting with pedestrians while pedestrians' gaze data and their subjective evaluation of the driving intentions were recorded. The experimental results supported our hypothesis as there was a negative correlation between the pedestrians' gaze duration on the AV and their understanding of the driving intentions of the AV. Moreover, the gaze duration of most of the pedestrians on the MV was shorter than that on an AV. Therefore, we conclude with two recommendations to designers of external human-machine interfaces (eHMI): (1) when a pedestrian is engaged in an interaction with an AV, the driving intentions of the AV should be provided; (2) if the pedestrian still gazes at the AV after the AV displays its driving intentions, the AV should provide clearer information about its driving intentions.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Human-Computer Interaction
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Improving fairness in machine learning systems: What do industry practitioners need?
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Identifying Stable Patterns over Time for Emotion Recognition from EEG
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Questioning the AI: Informing Design Practices for Explainable AI User Experiences
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Learning for Sensor-based Human Activity Recognition: Overview, Challenges and Opportunities
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Educational data mining and learning analytics: An updated survey
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted