S(c)entinel

Abstract

Overreliance in technology is safety-critical and it is assumed that this could have been a main cause of severe accidents with automated vehicles. To ease the complex task of permanently monitoring vehicle behavior in the driving environment, researchers have proposed to implement reliability/uncertainty displays. Such displays allow to estimate whether or not an upcoming intervention is likely. However, presenting uncertainty just adds more visual workload on drivers, who might also be engaged in secondary tasks. We suggest to use olfactory displays as a potential solution to communicate system uncertainty and conducted a user study (N=25) in a high-fidelity driving simulator. Results of the experiment (conditions: no reliability display, purely visual reliability display, and visual-olfactory reliability display) comping both objective (task performance) and subjective (technology acceptance model, trust scales, semi-structured interviews) measures suggest that olfactory notifications could become a valuable extension for calibrating trust in automated vehicles.

Feeling Uncertain—Effects of a Vibrotactile Belt that Communicates Vehicle Sensor Uncertainty

“…An important difference between earlier studies that have demonstrated successful communication of uncertainty (e.g., References [13,16,23]) and the work presented here, is that we relied on an implicit representation of uncertainty in the tactile modality: The uncertainty component was encoded within the spatiotemporal signaling functionality of our vibrotactile interface. Instead of explicitly stating that "I am uncertain", the machine agent implicitly communicates uncertainty by being less specific in its display of the location of objects.…”

“…Recent studies have investigated the use of touch [22], olfaction [23], as well as peripheral vision to share measures of system uncertainty with the driver. In particular, a driving simulator study by Kunze et al [22] investigated different variants of vibrotactile feedback in a car seat to communicate increases or decreases in the global uncertainty of an automated vehicle for initiating a takeover by the driver.…”

The influence of system transparency on trust: Evaluating interfaces in a highly automated vehicle

“…The communication of potential or actual hazards has been tested using diverse strategies, for example using visual (Wiegand et al, 2019), audible (Wong et al, 2019), haptic (Ma et al, 2019), olfactory (Wintersberger et al, 2019) and multimodal (Geitner et al, 2019) interfaces. Recent technological developments permit the construction of interfaces featuring augmented reality (AR).…”

Mode Awareness Interfaces in Automated Vehicles, Robotics, and Aviation: A Literature Review

“…Together or stand alone, second strongest trend in all domains is to use of graphics, icons and symbols to indicate the mode, responsibilities of the driver and capabilities of system. Especially in AD, representation of what driver should do both with text and graphics are a common way for communicating the information [3,26,27,36,44,46,54,71,80,86,89,94], similarly, in Aviation and HRI to support the textual information, graphics, icons and symbols are used often [12,79,91,92].…”

“…These are flashing of icons or light [15,19,32,37,79,86], animation of visuals [53], pop-up displays [17] and exclamation mark at the of sentences [2,36,44]. Also change of color, especially red to draw immediate attention [61,65] is a common approach to draw attention in all three domains [2,3,13,26,27,33,36,44,89].…”