Search

Highly automated shuttle vehicles (SAE Level 4) have the potential to enhance public transport services by decreasing the demand for drivers, enabling more frequent and flexible ride options. However, at least in a transitionary phase, safety operators that supervise and support the shuttles with their driving tasks may be required on board the vehicle from a technical or legal point of view. A crucial component for executing supervisory and intervening tasks is the human–machine interface between an automated vehicle and its on-board operator. This research presents in-depth case studies from three heterogenous living laboratories in Germany that deployed highly automated shuttle vehicles with on-board operators on public roads. The living labs differed significantly regarding the on-board operators' tasks and the design of the human–machine interfaces. Originally considered a provisional solution until the vehicle automation is fully capable of running without human support, these interfaces were, in general, not designed in a user-centered way. However, since technological progress has been slower than expected, on-board operator interfaces are likely to persist in the mid-term at least. Hence, this research aims to assess the aptitude of interfaces that are in practical use for the on-board operators' tasks, in order to determine the user-centered design of future interfaces. Completing questionnaires and undergoing comprehensive, semi-structured interviews, nine on-board operators evaluated their human–machine interfaces in light of the respective tasks they complete regarding user variables such as work context, acceptance, system transparency, and trust. The results were highly diverse across laboratories and underlined that the concrete system setup, encompassing task and interface design, has a considerable impact on these variables. Ergonomics, physical demand, and system transparency were identified as the most significant deficits. These findings and derived recommendations may inform the design of on-board operator workspaces, and bear implications for remote operation workstations as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Remote operation bears the potential to roll out highly automated vehicles (AVs, SAE Level 4) more safely and quickly. Moreover, legal regulations on highly automated driving, e.g., the current law on highly automated driving (SAE Level 4) in Germany, permit a remote supervisor to monitor and intervene in driving operations remotely in lieu of a safety operator on board AVs. In order to derive requirements for safe and effective remote driving and remote assistance of AVs and to create suitable human-centered design solutions for human-machine interfaces (HMIs) that serve this purpose, a set of 74 core scenarios that are likely to occur in public transport AVs under remote operation was compiled. The scenarios were collected in several projects on the remote operation of AVs across a variety of contexts including interviews with and observations of control center staff, video analyses from naturalistic road events, and interviews with safety operators of AVs. A hierarchical system that is based on interactions of central actors was used to structure the scenarios. The set explicates relevant cases in remote operation, which may help improve workplaces for remote operation both by combatting human factors issues such as distraction and fatigue, and by boosting usability, user experience, trust, and acceptance. As the catalogue of scenarios is not exhaustive, scenarios may be added as knowledge of the remote operation of AVs progresses. Further research is needed to validate and adapt the scenarios to specific conceptualizations of remote operations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]