No abstract

No abstract

In this paper, we present a proof-of-concept approach to estimating mental workload by measuring the user's pupil diameter under various controlled lighting conditions. Knowing the user's mental workload is desirable for many application scenarios, ranging from driving a car, to adaptive workplace setups. Typically, physiological sensors allow inferring mental workload, but these sensors might be rather uncomfortable to wear. Measuring pupil diameter through remote eye-tracking instead is an unobtrusive method. However, a practical eyetracking-based system must also account for pupil changes due to variable lighting conditions. Based on the results of a study with tasks of varying mental demand and six different lighting conditions, we built a simple model that is able to infer the workload independently of the lighting condition in 75 % of the tested conditions.

External Human-Machine Interfaces (eHMIs) are expected to bridge the communication gap between an automated vehicle (AV) and pedestrians to replace the missing driver-pedestrian interaction. However, the relative impact of movement-based implicit communication and explicit communication with the aid of eHMIs on pedestrians has not been studied and empirically evaluated. In this study, we pit messages from an eHMI against different driving behaviors of an AV that yields to a pedestrian to understand whether pedestrians tend to pay more attention to the motion dynamics of the car or the eHMI in making road-crossing decisions. Our contributions are twofold: we investigate (1) whether the presence of eHMIs has any objective effect on pedestrians’ understanding of the vehicle’s intent, and (2) how the movement dynamics of the vehicle affect the perception of the vehicle intent and interact with the impact of an eHMI. Results show that (1) eHMIs help in convincing pedestrians of the vehicle’s yielding intention, particularly when the speed of the vehicle is slow enough to not be an obvious threat, but still fast enough to raise a doubt about a vehicle’s stopping intention, and (2) pedestrians do not blindly trust the eHMI: when the eHMI message and the vehicle’s movement pattern contradict, pedestrians fall back to movement-based cues. Our results imply that when explicit communication (eHMI) and implicit communication (motion-dynamics and kinematics) are in alignment and work in tandem, communication of the AV’s yielding intention can be facilitated most effectively. This insight can be useful in designing the optimal interaction between AVs and pedestrians from a user-centered design perspective when driver-centric communication is not available.

No abstract