• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

应由驾驶员还是车辆本身来改变转向设置?

Should Steering Settings be Changed by the Driver or by the Vehicle Itself?

机构信息

Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands.

Group Renault, Guyancourt, France.

出版信息

Hum Factors. 2024 Apr;66(4):1201-1215. doi: 10.1177/00187208221127944. Epub 2022 Sep 23.

DOI:10.1177/00187208221127944
PMID:36150901
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10900860/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Cars are increasingly computerized, and vehicle settings such as steering gain (SG) can now be altered during driving. However, it is unknown whether transitions in SG should be adaptable (i.e., triggered by driver input) or adaptive (i.e., triggered automatically). We examined this question for road segments expected to require different SG.

OBJECTIVE

This paper aimed to investigate whether SG mode changes should be made by the driver or automatically.

METHODS

Twenty-four participants drove under four conditions in a simulator: fixed low gain (FL), fixed high gain (FH), a machine-initiated steering system, which switched between the two SG levels at predetermined locations (MI), and a driver-initiated steering system, in which the SG level could be changed by pressing a button on the steering wheel (DI).

RESULTS

Participants showed poorer lane-keeping and reported higher effort for FH compared to FL on straights, while the opposite held true on curved roads. On curved roads, the MI condition yielded better lane-keeping and lower subjective effort than the DI condition. However, a substantial portion of the drivers gave low preference rankings to the MI system.

CONCLUSION

Drivers prefer and benefit from a steering system with a variable rather than fixed gain. Furthermore, although automatic SG transitions reduce effort, some drivers reject this concept.

APPLICATION

As the state of technology advances, MI transitions are becoming increasingly feasible, but whether drivers would want to delegate their decision-making authority to a machine remains a moot point.

摘要

简介

汽车越来越电子化,车辆设置(如转向增益(SG))现在可以在驾驶过程中进行调整。然而,目前尚不清楚 SG 的变化是否应该是可适应的(即,由驾驶员输入触发)或自适应的(即,自动触发)。我们研究了在需要不同 SG 的道路段上,是否应该由驾驶员或自动进行 SG 模式的改变。

目的

本文旨在探讨 SG 模式的改变是应由驾驶员还是自动进行。

方法

24 名参与者在模拟器中进行了四种条件的驾驶:固定低增益(FL)、固定高增益(FH)、机器启动的转向系统,它在预定位置在两个 SG 水平之间切换(MI),以及驾驶员启动的转向系统,驾驶员可以通过按方向盘上的按钮来改变 SG 水平(DI)。

结果

与 FL 相比,FH 在直道上的车道保持和报告的努力度较差,而在弯道上则相反。在弯道上,MI 条件的车道保持和主观努力度都优于 DI 条件。然而,相当一部分驾驶员对 MI 系统的评价较低。

结论

驾驶员更喜欢和受益于具有可变而不是固定增益的转向系统。此外,尽管自动 SG 转换可降低努力度,但一些驾驶员拒绝这种概念。

应用

随着技术的发展,MI 转换变得越来越可行,但驾驶员是否愿意将决策权交给机器仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/da071ca833f8/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/291ed0d9e3f4/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/f868256a2b80/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/db7540967733/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/ba540946c8bd/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/da071ca833f8/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/291ed0d9e3f4/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/f868256a2b80/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/db7540967733/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/ba540946c8bd/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/df1a/10900860/da071ca833f8/10.1177_00187208221127944-fig5.jpg

相似文献

1
Should Steering Settings be Changed by the Driver or by the Vehicle Itself?应由驾驶员还是车辆本身来改变转向设置?
Hum Factors. 2024 Apr;66(4):1201-1215. doi: 10.1177/00187208221127944. Epub 2022 Sep 23.
2
Does haptic steering guidance instigate speeding? A driving simulator study into causes and remedies.触觉转向引导会引发超速吗?一项关于原因及补救措施的驾驶模拟器研究。
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 Jan;98:372-387. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.10.016. Epub 2016 Nov 16.
3
Driver response and recovery following automation initiated disengagement in real-world hands-free driving.真实世界中自动驾驶脱手后司机的反应和恢复能力。
Traffic Inj Prev. 2023;24(4):356-361. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2023.2189990. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
4
Effect of Fixed and sEMG-Based Adaptive Shared Steering Control on Distracted Driver Behavior.基于固定和表面肌电的自适应共享转向控制对分心驾驶员行为的影响。
Sensors (Basel). 2021 Nov 19;21(22):7691. doi: 10.3390/s21227691.
5
Steering Control in a Low-Cost Driving Simulator: A Case for the Role of Virtual Vehicle Cab.低成本驾驶模拟器中的转向控制:虚拟车辆驾驶室的作用案例。
Hum Factors. 2018 Aug;60(5):719-734. doi: 10.1177/0018720818769253. Epub 2018 Apr 17.
6
Keeping the driver in the loop through semi-automated or manual lane changes in conditionally automated driving.在条件自动化驾驶中,通过半自动或手动变道让驾驶员保持在循环中。
Accid Anal Prev. 2021 Nov;162:106397. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2021.106397. Epub 2021 Sep 24.
7
Driver behavior following an automatic steering intervention.驾驶员在自动转向干预后的驾驶行为。
Accid Anal Prev. 2015 Oct;83:190-6. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2015.07.018.
8
Moving Into the Loop: An Investigation of Drivers' Steering Behavior in Highly Automated Vehicles.进入循环:对高度自动驾驶车辆中驾驶员转向行为的调查
Hum Factors. 2020 Jun;62(4):671-683. doi: 10.1177/0018720819850283. Epub 2019 Jun 10.
9
Assessing drivers' response during automated driver support system failures with non-driving tasks.通过非驾驶任务评估自动驾驶员支持系统故障期间驾驶员的反应。
J Safety Res. 2017 Jun;61:149-155. doi: 10.1016/j.jsr.2017.02.009. Epub 2017 Mar 1.
10
Who is performing the driving tasks after interventions? Investigating drivers' understanding of mode transition logic in automated vehicles.干预措施实施后由谁来执行驾驶任务?调查驾驶员对自动驾驶车辆模式转换逻辑的理解。
Appl Ergon. 2024 Nov;121:104369. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2024.104369. Epub 2024 Aug 24.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparative Analysis of Adaptation Behaviors of Different Types of Drivers to Steer-by-Wire Systems.不同类型驾驶员对线控转向系统适应行为的对比分析
Sensors (Basel). 2024 Aug 28;24(17):5562. doi: 10.3390/s24175562.

本文引用的文献

1
Motor learning affects car-to-driver handover in automated vehicles.驾驶行为学习影响自动驾驶汽车的接管。
Sci Robot. 2016 Dec 6;1(1). doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aah5682. Epub 2016 Nov 16.
2
Smart In-Vehicle Technologies and Older Drivers: A Scoping Review.智能车载技术与老年驾驶员:一项范围综述
OTJR (Thorofare N J). 2019 Apr;39(2):97-107. doi: 10.1177/1539449219830376. Epub 2019 Feb 22.
3
Driver trust in five driver assistance technologies following real-world use in four production vehicles.在四款量产车辆上进行实际使用后,驾驶员对五种驾驶辅助技术的信任度。
Traffic Inj Prev. 2017 May 29;18(sup1):S44-S50. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2017.1297532. Epub 2017 Mar 1.
4
Toward best practice in Human Machine Interface design for older drivers: A review of current design guidelines.迈向老年驾驶员人机界面设计的最佳实践:当前设计指南综述
Accid Anal Prev. 2017 Sep;106:460-467. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2016.06.010. Epub 2016 Jun 30.
5
The effects of control-display gain on performance of race car drivers in an isometric braking task.控制-显示增益对赛车手在等长制动任务中表现的影响。
J Sports Sci. 2012 Dec;30(16):1747-56. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2012.713978. Epub 2012 Aug 16.
6
A comparison of adaptive and adaptable automation under different levels of environmental stress.不同环境压力水平下自适应和可适应自动化的比较。
Ergonomics. 2012;55(8):840-53. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2012.676673. Epub 2012 Apr 16.
7
G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.G*Power 3:一款适用于社会科学、行为科学和生物医学科学的灵活的统计功效分析程序。
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91. doi: 10.3758/bf03193146.
8
Designing for flexible interaction between humans and automation: delegation interfaces for supervisory control.设计人与自动化之间的灵活交互:监督控制的委托接口
Hum Factors. 2007 Feb;49(1):57-75. doi: 10.1518/001872007779598037.
9
Violations and errors during simulation-based driver training.基于模拟的驾驶员培训中的违规行为和错误。
Ergonomics. 2007 Jan 15;50(1):138-58. doi: 10.1080/00140130601032721.