Skip to main content

Learning the “Language” of Road Users - How Shall a Self-driving Car Convey Its Intention to Cooperate to Other Human Drivers?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 592))

Abstract

Communication between road users is ruled by road traffic regulations, but there are also implicit laws of communication. Especially lane changes in dense traffic scenarios require not only communicating one’s intention but also cooperating with other drivers. Self-driving vehicles will need to communicate with conventional vehicles on the road during the transition period to full automation. But how does a driver show his willingness to cooperate? A driving simulator study with N = 28 drivers in a dense traffic scenario on the highway was conducted. It was assumed that different lag vehicle reaction behavior on turn signals of the ego driver would influence the ego driver in his subjective evaluation of the situation. Three main effects, deceleration, the amount of velocity reduction and reaction time concerning perceived cooperation were found. The results of the study can be used to design cooperative driving strategies between self-driving and manually driven vehicles.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. EC: WHITE PAPER: roadmap to a single European transport area. In: European Commission, p. 31 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sivak, M., Schoettle, B.: Road Safety with Self-Driving Vehicles: General Limitations and Road Sharing with Conventional Vehicles. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Nees, M.A.: Acceptance of self-driving cars: an examination of idealized versus realistic portrayals with a self- driving car acceptance scale. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 60(1), 1449–1453 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hoff, K.A., Bashir, M.: Trust in automation. Hum. Factors 57(3), 407–434 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ahmed, K.I.: Modeling drivers’ acceleration and lane changing behavior. Transportation (Amst) Ph. D., 189 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gipps, P.: A model for the structure of lane-changing decisions. Transp. Res. Part B 20(5), 403–414 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Choudhury, C.F., Ben-Akiva, M.E., Toledo, T., Lee G., Rao, A.: Modeling cooperative lane-changing and forced merging behavior. In: 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Färber B.: Kommunikationsprobleme zwischen autonomen Fahrzeugen und menschlichen Fahrern. In: Autonomes Fahren, pp. 127–146. Springer, Berlin (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Merten, K: Kommunikationsprozesse im Straßenverkehr (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Maurer, M., Gerdes, C.J., Lenz, B., Winner, H.: Autonomes Fahren (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Risser, R.: Kommunikation und Kultur des Straßenverkehrs (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Watzlawick, P., et al.: Menschliche Kommunikation: Formen, Störungen, Paradoxien. Huber, New Jersey (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ellinghaus, D.: Rücksichtslosigkeit und Partnerschaft. IFAPLAN, Köln (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Maag, C.: Fahrer und Verkehrsklima (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Benmimoun, A., Neunzig, D., Maag, C.: Effizienzsteigerung durch professionelles/partnerschaftliches Verhalten im Straßenverkehr. FAT-Schriftenreihe no.1811, Frankfurt/Main (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Zimmermann, M., Fahrmeier, L., Bengler, K.J.: A Roland for an Oliver? Subjective perception of cooperation during conditionally automated driving. Int Conf. Collab. Technol. Syst. CTS 2015, 57–63 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kandada, S., Bham, G.H.: Driver mandatory lane change behavior: use of governing gap in critical gap estimation. In: Transportation Research Board, 92nd Annual Meeting (2013). Paper No. 13-5151

    Google Scholar 

  18. Henning, M.J.: Preparation for lane change manoeuvres: behavioural indicators and underlying cognitive processes, p. 163 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Green, M.: How long does it take to stop? Methodological analysis of driver perception-brake times. Transp. Hum. Factors 2(3), 195–216 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Johansson, G., Rumar, K.: Drivers’ brake reaction times. Hum. Factors 13(1), 23–27 (1971)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Broen, N.L., Chiang, D.P.: Braking response times for 100 drivers in the avoidance of an unexpected obstacle as measured in a driving simulator. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meet. 40(18), 900–904 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ellinghaus, D., Welbers, M.: Vorschrift und Verhalten. Eine empirische Untersuchung über den Umgang mit Verkehrsregeln, 3. Auflage. IFAPLAN, Köln (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Ehmanns, D.: Simulation Model of Human Lane Change Behaviour. In: Der Fahrer im 21. Jahrhundert?: Tagung Berlin, 3. und 4. Mai 2001, pp. 203–216 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kesting, A., Treiber, M., Helbing, D.: General lane-changing model MOBIL for car-following models. Transp. Res. Rec. J. Transp. Res. Board 1999(1), 86–94 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gerlough, J., Daniel, L., Huber, M.: Traffic Flow Theory: A Monograph, pp. 17–31, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C. (1975). Special re.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Barreit, G.V.: Feasibility of studying driver reaction to sudden pedestrian emergencies in an automobile simulator. Hum. Factors 10, 19–26 (1968)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Evans, L.: Traffic safety. Science Serving Society, Bloomfield Hills (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ohta, H.: Individual differences in driving distance headway. In: Gale, S., Brown, A.G., Haslegrave, I.D., Moorhead, C.M., Taylor, I. (eds.) Vision in Vehicles, pp. 91–100. Elsevier Science, London (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Neukum, A., Naujoks, F., Kappes, S.: Kontrollierbarkeit unerwarteter Eingriffe eines Bremsassistenzsystems aus Perspektive des Folgeverkehrs

    Google Scholar 

  30. Heller, O.: Hörfeldaudiometrie mit dem Verfahren der Kategorienunterteilung (KU). Psychol. Beiträge 27, 478–493 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Green, D.M., Swets, J.A.: Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics. Peninsula Pub, Baileys Harbor (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Hoffmann, S., Buld, S.: Darstellung und Evaluation eines Trainings zum Fahren in der Fahrsimulation. In: VDI Wissensforum (ed.) Integrierte Sicherheit und Fahrerassistenzsysteme, pp. 113–132 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nina Kauffmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Kauffmann, N., Naujoks, F., Winkler, F., Kunde, W. (2018). Learning the “Language” of Road Users - How Shall a Self-driving Car Convey Its Intention to Cooperate to Other Human Drivers?. In: Nunes, I. (eds) Advances in Human Factors and Systems Interaction. AHFE 2017. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 592. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60366-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60366-7_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60365-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60366-7

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics