Search Results

In the U.S., the teenage driving population is at the highest risk of being involved in a crash. Teens often demonstrate poor vehicle control skills and poor ability to identify hazards, thus proper understanding of automotive indicators and warnings may be even more critical for this population. This research evaluates teen drivers’, between 15 to 17 years of age, understanding of symbols from vehicles featuring advanced driving assistant systems and multiple powertrain configurations. Teen drivers’ (N=72) understanding of automotive symbols was compared to three other groups with specialized driving experience and technical knowledge: automotive engineering graduate students (N=48), driver rehabilitation specialists (N=16), and performance driving instructors (N=15). Participants matched 42 symbols to their descriptions and then selected the five symbols they considered most important.

Testing any new safety technology of Autonomous Vehicles (AV) and Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS) requires simulation-based validation and verification. The specific scenarios used for testing, outline incidences of accidents or near-miss events. In order to simulate these scenarios, specific values for all the above parameters are required including the ego vehicle model. The ‘criticality’ of a scenario is defined in terms of the difficulty level of the safety maneuver. A scenario could be over-critical, critical, or under-critical. In over-critical scenarios, it is impossible to avoid a crash whereas, for under-critical scenarios, no action may be required to avoid a crash. The criticality of the scenario depends on various parameters e.g. speeds, distances, road/tire parameters, etc. In this paper, we propose a definition of criticality metric and identify the parameters such that a scenario becomes critical.

In this paper, we present a framework for the robot to learn how to place objects to a workpiece by learning from humans in smart manufacturing. In the proposed framework, the rational scene dictionary (RSD) corresponding to the keyframes of task (KFT) are used to identify the general object-action-location relationships. The Generalized Voronoi Diagrams (GVD) based contour is used to determine the relative position and orientation between the object and the corresponding workpiece at the final state. In the learning phase, we keep tracking the image segments in the human demonstration. For the moment when a spatial relation of some segments are changed in a discontinuous way, the state changes are recorded by the RSD. KFT is abstracted after traversing and searching in RSD, while the relative position and orientation of the object and the corresponding mount are presented by GVD-based contours for the keyframes.

Since 1989, ISO has published procedures for developing and testing public information symbols (ISO 9186), while the SAE standard for in-vehicle icon comprehension testing (SAE J2830) was first published in 2008. Neither testing method was designed to evaluate the comprehension of symbols in modern vehicles that offer digital instrument cluster interfaces that afford new levels of flexibility to further improve drivers’ understanding of symbols. Using a driving simulator equipped with an eye tracker, this study investigated drivers’ understanding of six automotive symbols presented on in-vehicle displays. Participants included 24 teens, 24 adults, and 24 senior drivers. Symbols were presented in a symbol-only, symbol + short text descriptions, and symbol + long text description conditions. Participants’ symbol comprehension, driving performance, reaction times, and eye glance times were measured.