Driver behavior and the use of automation in real-world driving
Highlights
- •
While partial-automation is widely used, drivers frequently takeover control.
- •
Driver-initiated TOCs are not necessarily related to immediate risk mitigation.
- •
Driver-initiated TOCs follow the hierarchical model of driver behavior.
- •
TOCs are part of the Strategic, Maneuver, and Control levels of decision making.
- •
Strategic, Maneuver, and Control TOCs have distinct kinematics, modality, and duration.
Abstract
Background
The emergence of partial-automation in consumer vehicles is reshaping the driving task, the driver role, and subsequent driver behavior. When using partial-automation, drivers delegate the operational control of the dynamic driving task to the automation system, while remaining responsible for monitoring, object/event detection, response selection, and execution. Hence, driving has become a collaboration between driver and automation systems that is characterized by dynamic Transfers of Control (TOC).
Objective
This study aimed to assess how drivers leverage automation in real-world driving, identify driver and system-initiated TOCs, and provide a taxonomy to capture the underlying driver behaviors associated with automation disengagement.
Methods
Fourteen participants drove instrumented Cadillac CT6 vehicles for one-month each, yielding 1690 trips (22,108 miles), with a total of 5343 TOCs between manual driving, SAE Level 1 Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC), and SAE Level 2 Super Cruise (SC).
Results
The use of automation on limited access highways was prevalent (40 % of the miles driven were with SC and 10 % with ACC) yet not continuous. Drivers frequently initiated transitions between automation levels (mean = 9.98, SD = 8.32, transitions per trip), temporarily taking over the longitudinal and/or lateral vehicle control. These transitions were not necessarily related to immediate risk mitigation, but rather to the execution of functions beyond the automation system’s capabilities or representing preferences in task execution. Driver-initiated TOCs from SC to manual driving followed the structure and temporal aspects of the hierarchical model of driver behavior. Strategic, Maneuver, and Control TOCs were associated with significantly different patterns of vehicle kinematics, automation disengagement modality, and TOC duration. System-initiated automation disengagements from SC to manual driving were rare (1%).
Conclusions
Generalizing from objective, real-world driving data, this study provides an ecologically valid taxonomy for transfer of control building upon the hierarchical model of driver behavior. We show that driver-automation interactions can occur in each level of the hierarchical model and that TOCs are part of the driver’s strategic, maneuver, and control levels of decision making. Thus, TOCs are not isolated or rare events, but rather an integral part of an ongoing, continuous and dynamic collaboration. This taxonomy contextualizes TOCs, paving the way for greater understanding of when and why drivers will takeover control, exposes the underlying motivations for TOCs, and characterizes how these are reflected in the driver’s actions. The findings can inform the development of driver-centered automation systems as well as policies and guidelines for current and future automation levels.