Connected and Automated Vehicle Simulation to Enhance Vehicle Message Delivery

1. Naylor, N.: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 3 Feb 2014. http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2014/USDOT+to+Move+Forward+with+Vehicle-to-Vehicle+Communication+Technology+for+Light+Vehicles. Accessed 06 Jan 2016

2. Morgan Stanley. Autonomous Cars: The Future is Now. 23 January 2015 http://www.morganstanley.com/articles/autonomous-cars-the-future-is-now. Accessed 24 Feb 2016

3. National highway traffic safety administration. In: Prelimnary Statement of Policy Concerning Automated Vehicles. United States Department of Transportation, Washington (2014)

   Google Scholar 

4. Robinson, R., Dion, F.: Multipath SPAT Broadcast Project. Michigan Department of Transportation, Lansing (2013)

   Google Scholar 

5. Iselin, E.R.: The effects of information load and information diversity on decision quality in structured decision task. Acounting Organ. Soc. 13(2), 147–164 (1998)

   Article  Google Scholar 

6. Miller, G.A.: The magic number of seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol. Rev. 63, 81–97 (1956)

   Article  Google Scholar 

7. Streufert, S.C.: Complexity and complex decision making: convergences between differentiation and integration approaches to the prediction of task performance. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 6(4), 494–509 (1970)

   Article  Google Scholar 

8. Streufert, S.C.: Effects of information relevance on decision making in complex environments. Mem. Cogn. 1(3), 224–228 (1973)

   Article  Google Scholar 

9. Carsten, O., Nilsson, L.: Safety assessment of driver assistance systems. Eur. J. Transp. Infrastruct. Res. 1, 225–243 (2001)

   Google Scholar 

10. ECMT. Statement of principles of good practice concerning the ergonomics and safety of in-vehicle information systems. In: New Information Technologies in the Road Transport Sector: Policy Issues. Ergonomics and Safety (1995)

    Google Scholar 

11. Rumar, K.: The basic driver error: late detection. Ergonomics 3, 1281–1290 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

12. Rakotonirainy, A., Steinhardt, D.: In-vehicle technology functional requirements for older drivers. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. Essen, Germany (2009)

    Google Scholar 

13. U.S. Department of Transportation. V2V Communications Fact Sheet. http://www.safercar.gov/staticfiles/safercar/v2v/V2V_Fact_Sheet_101414_v2a.pdf. Accessed 14 Oct 2014

14. Koustanai, A., Delhomme, P., Mas, A.: Simulator training with a forward collision warning system: effects on driver-system interactions and driver trust. Hum. Factors 54(5), 709–721 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

15. Muhrer, E., Reinprecht, K., Vollrath, M.: Driving with a partially autonomous forward collision warning system: how do drivers react? Hum. Factors 54(5), 698–708 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

16. Mattes, S.: The lane change task as a tool for driver distraction. Qual. Work Prod. Enterp. Future 2003, 57–60 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

17. Cotte, N., Meyer, J., Coughlin, J.F.: Older and younger drivers’ reliance on collision warning systems. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting. Minneapolis (2001)

    Google Scholar 

18. Verberne, F.M.F., Ham, J., Midden, C.J.H.: Trust in smart systems: sharing driving goals and giving information to increase trustworthiness and acceptability of smart systems in cars. Hum. Factors 54(5), 799–810 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

19. Singer, J., Lerner, N., Walrath, J., Gill, M.: Warning and message perception under ambient noise conditions: on-road experiment report under crash warning interface metrics 3 program. US Department of Transportation, Washington (2015)

    Google Scholar 

20. Sayer, J., LeBlanc, D., Bogard, S., Funkhouser, S., Bao, D., Buonarosa, M.L., Blankespoor, A.: Integrated vehicle-based safety systems field operational test final program report. U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington D.C. (2011)

    Google Scholar 

21. Fitch, G.M., Bowman, D.S., Llaneras, E.: Using wizard of oz technique to evaluate connected vehicles: distracted driver performance to multiple alerts in a multiple-conflict scenario. In: Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 93rd, Washington D.C. (2014)

    Google Scholar 

22. Streufert, S.: Complexity and complex decision making: convergences between differentiation and integration approaches to the prediction of task performance. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 6(4), 494–509 (1970)

    Article  Google Scholar 

23. Streufert, S.C.: Effects of information relevance on decision making in complex environments. Mem. Cogn. 1(3), 224–228 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

24. Epic Games. Unreal Engine Epic Games https://www.unrealengine.com/what-is-unreal-engine-4. Accessed 10 Feb 2017

25. Barber, D., Abich IV, J., Phillips, E., Talone, A., Jentsch, F., Hill, S.: Field assessment of multimodal communication for dismounted human-robot teams. In: The Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, Las Angeles, CA (2015)

    Google Scholar 

26. Wikipedia. JAUS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAUS. Accessed 06 Jan 2015

27. Barber, D., Davis, L., Nicholson, D., Chen, J.Y., Finkelstein, N.: The mixed-initiative experimental testbed for collaborative human robot interactions. In: 26th Army Science Conference, Orlando, FL USA (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references