On the Forces of Driver Distraction: Explainable Predictions for the Visual Demand of In-Vehicle Touchscreen Interactions

January 05, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Accident Analysis and Prevention

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Patrick Ebel, Christoph Lingenfelder, Andreas Vogelsang arXiv ID 2301.02065 Category cs.HC: Human-Computer Interaction Cross-listed cs.AI Citations 33 Venue Accident Analysis and Prevention Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
With modern infotainment systems, drivers are increasingly tempted to engage in secondary tasks while driving. Since distracted driving is already one of the main causes of fatal accidents, in-vehicle touchscreen Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs) must be as little distracting as possible. To ensure that these systems are safe to use, they undergo elaborate and expensive empirical testing, requiring fully functional prototypes. Thus, early-stage methods informing designers about the implication their design may have on driver distraction are of great value. This paper presents a machine learning method that, based on anticipated usage scenarios, predicts the visual demand of in-vehicle touchscreen interactions and provides local and global explanations of the factors influencing drivers' visual attention allocation. The approach is based on large-scale natural driving data continuously collected from production line vehicles and employs the SHapley Additive exPlanation (SHAP) method to provide explanations leveraging informed design decisions. Our approach is more accurate than related work and identifies interactions during which long glances occur with 68 % accuracy and predicts the total glance duration with a mean error of 2.4 s. Our explanations replicate the results of various recent studies and provide fast and easily accessible insights into the effect of UI elements, driving automation, and vehicle speed on driver distraction. The system can not only help designers to evaluate current designs but also help them to better anticipate and understand the implications their design decisions might have on future designs.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Human-Computer Interaction

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted