Comparing Coupled and Decoupled Steering Interface Designs for Emergency Obstacle Evasion

Abstract

Automatic evasive steering maneuvers can outperform human-initiated steering maneuvers in emergency situations. A steering interface that decouples the steering wheel from the tires may enhance the efficiency of automatic steering maneuvers by providing full authority to the automation system. Yet, an alternative interface in which the steering wheel remains coupled to the tires has the advantages of enabling the driver to intervene in the event of an automation failure and preventing the human factors issues associated with decoupling the driver. In this paper, we present a driving simulator study with 64 participants where we compared four steering interface design schemes in their ability to enable successful obstacle evasion in emergency scenarios. The steering wheel was either decoupled from the tires and the automation was given full authority, or the steering wheel was coupled to the tires and the automation was provided high, low or no authority. The automation was designed to avoid all obstacles, except for the last one when it failed unexpectedly. Results uncovered a design tradeoff: as the authority of an agent (driver or automation) increases, the protection against the agent's faults (provided by the other agent) reduces. The results also show that decoupled driving reduced driver's vigilance and mode awareness and deprived the drivers of the authority required to intervene during automation faults. Coupled driving alleviated these issues but caused driver discomfort when designed with high automation authority and resulted in a larger number of collisions during perfect automation operation when designed with low automation authority.

How to Design Human-Vehicle Cooperation for Automated Driving: A Review of Use Cases, Concepts, and Interfaces

“…ACM Digital Library: [10,20,21,26,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42] Scopus: [22,[43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60] IEEE Xplore: [61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69] Google Scholar: [70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78]…”

“…In our literature survey, we did not come across research work on this topic, despite teleoperation in automated vehicles becoming a more and more relevant research area. Discrete and Deterministic [26,[34][35][36][47][48][49][50]54,59,63,65,71,75,76] Continuous and Negotiated [10,[20][21][22]37,[39][40][41]43,45,[51][52][53]55,56,58,[60][61][62]64,[66][67][68]70,77,78] Discrete and Negotiated [38,44,46,69] Agents Task Residuals Task Level Strategical -Tactical [20][21][22]26,…”

“…Input Modality Haptic [10,26,[34][35][36][37][38][39]41,[44][45][46][47][49][50][51][52][53][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65][66][67][68][69]71,72,[75][76][77][78] Auditory [40] Gaze [21] Multiple Modalities [20,22,43,48,54,70] Output Modality Visual [21,22,26,34,[40]…”