Himanshu Verma
Guillaume Pythoud
Denis Lalanne
Skip Abstract Section
Skip Supplemental Material SectionAbstract
Autonomous Passenger Shuttles (APS) are rapidly becoming an urban public transit alternative. Traversing populous commercial and residential centers, these shuttles are already operating in several cities. In the absence of a human driver and embedded means of communicating the autonomous shuttle's intent, the task of seamlessly navigating crosswalks and pedestrian-friendly zones becomes a challenging pursuit for pedestrians.
We contribute to the emerging notion of AV-Pedestrian Interaction by examining the context of autonomous passenger shuttles (APS) in real-world settings, and by comparing four different classes of visual signals -- namely instructional, symbolic, metaphorical, and anthropomorphic -- designed to communicate the shuttle's intentions. Following a participatory methodology involving local residents and public transport service provider, and working within the framework of inflexible road traffic regulations concerning the operation and testing of autonomous vehicles, we conducted a participatory design workshop, a qualitative, and a survey study. The findings revealed differences across these four classes of signals in terms of pedestrians' subjective perceptions. Anthropomorphic signals were identified as the preferred and effective modality in terms of pedestrians' interpretation of the communicated intent and their perceived sense of attention, confidence, and calmness. Additionally, pedestrians' experiences while judging the intention of transitionary vehicular states (starting/slowing) were reported as perplexing and evoked stress. These findings were translated into design and policy implications in collaboration with other stakeholders, and exemplify a viable way for assimilating human factors research in urban mobility.
Supplemental Material
Available for Download
zip
verma.zip (88.6 MB)
Supplemental movie, appendix, image and software files for, Pedestrians and Visual Signs of Intent: Towards Expressive Autonomous Passenger Shuttles
- Hamed S. Alavi, Farzaneh Bahrami, Himanshu Verma, and Denis Lalanne. 2017. Is Driverless Car Another Weiserian Mistake?. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '17 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 249--253. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Saleema Amershi, Dan Weld, Mihaela Vorvoreanu, Adam Fourney, Besmira Nushi, Penny Collisson, Jina Suh, Shamsi Iqbal, Paul N. Bennett, Kori Inkpen, Jaime Teevan, Ruth Kikin-Gil, and Eric Horvitz. 2019. Guidelines for Human-AI Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 3, 13 pages. Google ScholarDigital Library
- James M Anderson, Kalra Nidhi, Karlyn D Stanley, Paul Sorensen, Constantine Samaras, and Oluwatobi A Oluwatola. 2014. Autonomous vehicle technology: A guide for policymakers. Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
- F Gregory Ashby and Nancy A Perrin. 1988. Toward a unified theory of similarity and recognition. Psychological review 95, 1 (1988), 124.Google Scholar
- Jimi Beckwith. 2018. Jaguar Land Rover gives driverless pods 'eyes' to signal road users. https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/jaguar-land-rover-gives-driverless-pods-eyes-signal-road-users. {Online; accessed 3-September-2018}.Google Scholar
- Brett Berk. 2015. How Nissan's Using Anthropology to Make Autonomous Cars Safe. http://www.thedrive.com/tech/999/how-nissans-using-anthropology-to-make-autonomous-cars-safe. {Online; accessed 3-September-2018}.Google Scholar
- The League of American Bicyclists Bikeleague. 2014. Autonomous and Connected Vehicles: Implications for Bicyclists and Pedestrians. https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/Bike_Ped_Connected_Vehicles.pdf. {Online; accessed 26-April-2019}.Google Scholar
- Laurens Boer and Jared Donovan. 2012. Provotypes for participatory innovation. In Proceedings of the designing interactive systems conference. ACM, 388--397. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patrick M Boesch, Francesco Ciari, and Kay W Axhausen. 2016. Autonomous vehicle fleet sizes required to serve different levels of demand. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2542 (2016), 111--119.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Patrick M Bösch, Felix Becker, Henrik Becker, and Kay W Axhausen. 2018. Cost-based analysis of autonomous mobility services. Transport Policy 64 (2018), 76--91.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lawrence D Burns. 2013. Sustainable mobility: a vision of our transport future. Nature 497, 7448 (2013), 181.Google Scholar
- Stephen M. Casner, Edwin L. Hutchins, and Don Norman. 2016. The Challenges of Partially Automated Driving. Commun. ACM 59, 5 (April 2016), 70--77. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chia-Ming Chang, Koki Toda, Daisuke Sakamoto, and Takeo Igarashi. 2017. Eyes on a Car: An Interface Design for Communication Between an Autonomous Car and a Pedestrian. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '17). 65--73. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Vicky Charisi, Azra Habibovic, Jonas Andersson, Jamy Li, and Vanessa Evers. 2017. Children's Views on Identification and Intention Communication of Self-driving Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 399--404. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael Clamann, Miles Aubert, and Mary L Cummings. 2017. Evaluation of vehicle-to-pedestrian communication displays for autonomous vehicles. Technical Report.Google Scholar
- Debargha Dey, Marieke Martens, Berry Eggen, and Jacques Terken. 2017. The Impact of Vehicle Appearance and Vehicle Behavior on Pedestrian Interaction with Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications Adjunct (AutomotiveUI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 158--162. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Grace Eden. 2018. Transforming Cars into Computers: Interdisciplinary Opportunities for HCI. In Proceedings of 32nd BCS HCI Conference, Belfast, UK, 2018. British Human Computer Interaction (BHCI). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Grace Eden, Benjamin Nanchen, Randolf Ramseyer, and Florian Evéquoz. 2017. On the road with an autonomous passenger shuttle: integration in public spaces. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1569--1576. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel J Fagnant and Kara Kockelman. 2015. Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 77 (2015), 167--181.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Moran Furman and Xiao-Jing Wang. 2008. Similarity effect and optimal control of multiple-choice decision making. Neuron 60, 6 (2008), 1153--1168.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nikhil Gowda, Wendy Ju, and Kirstin Kohler. 2014. Dashboard Design for an Autonomous Car. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. ACM, 1--4. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nicolas Guéguen, Sébastien Meineri, and Chloé Eyssartier. 2015. A pedestrian's stare and drivers' stopping behavior: A field experiment at the pedestrian crossing. Safety science 75 (2015), 87--89.Google Scholar
- Azra Habibovic, Victor Malmsten Lundgren, Jonas Andersson, Maria KlingegÃěrd, Tobias LagstrÃűm, Anna Sirkka, Johan FagerlÃűnn, Claes Edgren, Rikard Fredriksson, Stas Krupenia, Dennis SaluÃd'Ãdr, and Pontus Larsson. 2018. Communicating Intent of Automated Vehicles to Pedestrians. Frontiers in Psychology 9 (2018), 1336.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jeffrey Heer and Michael Bostock. 2010. Crowdsourcing graphical perception: using mechanical turk to assess visualization design. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 203--212. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kyeil Kim, Guy Rousseau, Joel Freedman, and Jonathan Nicholson. 2015. The travel impact of autonomous vehicles in metro atlanta through activity-based modeling. In The 15th TRB National Transportation Planning Applications Conference.Google Scholar
- Jeamin Koo, Jungsuk Kwac, Wendy Ju, Martin Steinert, Larry Leifer, and Clifford Nass. 2015. Why did my car just do that? Explaining semi-autonomous driving actions to improve driver understanding, trust, and performance. International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) 9, 4 (2015), 269--275.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Miltos Kyriakidis, Riender Happee, and Joost CF de Winter. 2015. Public opinion on automated driving: Results of an international questionnaire among 5000 respondents. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour 32 (2015), 127--140.Google Scholar
- T Lagstrom and Victor Malmsten Lundgren. 2015. AVIP-Autonomous vehicles interaction with pedestrians. Master of Science Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology (2015).Google Scholar
- John D Lee and Katrina A See. 2004. Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human factors 46, 1 (2004), 50--80.Google Scholar
- Duri Long, Mikhail Jacob, and Brian Magerko. 2019. Designing Co-Creative AI for Public Spaces. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Creativity and Cognition (C&C '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 271--284. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Victor Malmsten Lundgren, Azra Habibovic, Jonas Andersson, Tobias Lagström, Maria Nilsson, Anna Sirkka, Johan Fagerlönn, Rikard Fredriksson, Claes Edgren, Stas Krupenia, et al. 2017. Will There Be New Communication Needs When Introducing Automated Vehicles to the Urban Context? In Advances in Human Aspects of Transportation. Springer, 485--497.Google Scholar
- Karthik Mahadevan, Elaheh Sanoubari, Sowmya Somanath, James E. Young, and Ehud Sharlin. 2019. AV-Pedestrian Interaction Design Using a Pedestrian Mixed Traffic Simulator. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 475--486. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Karthik Mahadevan, Sowmya Somanath, and Ehud Sharlin. 2018. Communicating Awareness and Intent in Autonomous Vehicle-Pedestrian Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 429, 12 pages. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Milecia Matthews, Girish Chowdhary, and Emily Kieson. 2017. Intent Communication between Autonomous Vehicles and Pedestrians. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.07123 (2017).Google Scholar
- Alexander Meschtscherjakov, Alina Krischkowsky, Katja Neureiter, Alexander Mirnig, Axel Baumgartner, Verena Fuchsberger, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2016. Active corners: Collaborative in-car interaction design. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, 1136--1147. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jonas Meyer, Henrik Becker, Patrick M Bösch, and Kay W Axhausen. 2017. Autonomous vehicles: The next jump in accessibilities? Research in Transportation Economics 62 (2017), 80--91.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Adam Millard-Ball. 2018. Pedestrians, Autonomous Vehicles, and Cities. Journal of Planning Education and Research 38, 1 (2018), 6--12.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sina Nordhoff, Joost de Winter, Ruth Madigan, Natasha Merat, Bart van Arem, and Riender Happee. 2018. User acceptance of automated shuttles in Berlin-Schöneberg: A questionnaire study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 58 (2018), 843--854.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert M Nosofsky. 1986. Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of experimental psychology: General 115, 1 (1986), 39.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Enrica Papa and António Ferreira. 2018. Sustainable Accessibility and the Implementation of Automated Vehicles: Identifying Critical Decisions. Urban Science 2, 1 (2018), 5.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Anantha Krishna Pillai. 2017. Virtual Reality based Study to Analyse Pedestrian attitude towards Autonomous Vehicles.Google Scholar
- Ioannis Politis, Stephen Brewster, and Frank Pollick. 2015. Language-based Multimodal Displays for the Handover of Control in Autonomous Cars. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 3--10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Amir Rasouli, Iuliia Kotseruba, and John K Tsotsos. 2017. Agreeing to cross: How drivers and pedestrians communicate. In Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2017 IEEE. IEEE, 264--269.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Amir Rasouli, Iuliia Kotseruba, and John K Tsotsos. 2018. Understanding pedestrian behavior in complex traffic scenes. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles 3, 1 (2018), 61--70.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Amir Rasouli and John K Tsotsos. 2019. Autonomous vehicles that interact with pedestrians: A survey of theory and practice. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems (2019).Google Scholar
- Zeheng Ren, Xiaobei Jiang, and Wuhong Wang. 2016. Analysis of the Influence of Pedestrians' eye Contact on Drivers' Comfort Boundary During the Crossing Conflict. Procedia engineering 137 (2016), 399--406.Google Scholar
- Malte Risto, Colleen Emmenegger, Erik Vinkhuyzen, Melissa Cefkin, and Jim Hollan. 2017. Human-Vehicle Interfaces: The Power of Vehicle Movement Gestures in Human Road User Coordination. (2017).Google Scholar
- Yvonne Rogers. 2011. Interaction design gone wild: striving for wild theory. interactions 18, 4 (2011), 58--62. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dirk Rothenbücher, Jamy Li, David Sirkin, Brian Mok, and Wendy Ju. 2016. Ghost driver: A field study investigating the interaction between pedestrians and driverless vehicles. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on. IEEE, 795--802.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Brandon Schoettle and Michael Sivak. 2014. Public opinion about self-driving vehicles in China, India, Japan, the US, the UK, and Australia. (2014).Google Scholar
- Brandon Schoettle and Michael Sivak. 2014. A survey of public opinion about autonomous and self-driving vehicles in the US, the UK, and Australia. (2014).Google Scholar
- Christopher Stanton and Catherine J Stevens. 2014. Robot pressure: the impact of robot eye gaze and lifelike bodily movements upon decision-making and trust. In International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 330--339.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andrea Thomaz, Guy Hoffman, Maya Cakmak, et al. 2016. Computational human-robot interaction. Foundations and Trends® in Robotics 4, 2-3 (2016), 105--223. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Marcel Walch, Kristin Lange, Martin Baumann, and Michael Weber. 2015. Autonomous Driving: Investigating the Feasibility of Car-driver Handover Assistance. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '15). 11--18. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wei Xu. 2019. Toward human-centered AI: a perspective from human-computer interaction. interactions 26, 4 (2019), 42--46. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rosemarie E Yagoda and Douglas J Gillan. 2012. You want me to trust a ROBOT? The development of a human-robot interaction trust scale. International Journal of Social Robotics 4, 3 (2012), 235--248.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Su Yang. 2017. Driver behavior impact on pedestrians' crossing experience in the conditionally autonomous driving context.Google Scholar
- Raphael Zimmermann and Reto Wettach. 2017. First Step into Visceral Interaction with Autonomous Vehicles. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '17). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 58--64. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Pedestrians and Visual Signs of Intent: Towards Expressive Autonomous Passenger Shuttles
Recommendations
Engaging Pedestrians in Designing Interactions with Autonomous Vehicles
CHI EA '19: Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsDriverless Passenger Shuttles are operating as a public transport alternative in the town of Sion, Switzerland since June'16, and traversing the populated commercial and residential zones of the city center. The absence of a human driver and the lack of ...
TAAWUN: a Decision Fusion and Feature Specific Road Detection Approach for Connected Autonomous Vehicles
AbstractRoad transportation is among the global grand challenges affecting human lives, health, society, and economy, caused due to road accidents, traffic congestion, and other transportation deficiencies. Autonomous vehicles (AVs) are set to address ...
Urban Public Transportation Ecological Niche Marginal Distance Base on Passenger Trip Cost Analysis
ICICTA '09: Proceedings of the 2009 Second International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation - Volume 03In the system of urban public transportation, the primary contradiction is contest with service object between convention public buses and urban rail transit at present. The analysis of this study is based on the passenger trip cost, and the ecological ...
Comments