skip to main content
10.1145/2799250.2799288acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesautomotiveuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The RRADS platform: a real road autonomous driving simulator

Published:01 September 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

This platform paper introduces a methodology for simulating an autonomous vehicle on open public roads. The paper outlines the technology and protocol needed for running these simulations, and describes an instance where the Real Road Autonomous Driving Simulator (RRADS) was used to evaluate 3 prototypes in a between-participant study design. 35 participants were interviewed at length before and after entering the RRADS. Although our study did not use overt deception---the consent form clearly states that a licensed driver is operating the vehicle---the protocol was designed to support suspension of disbelief. Several participants who did not read the consent form clearly strongly believed that they were interacting with a fully autonomous vehicle.

The RRADS platform provides a lens onto the attitudes and concerns that people in real-world autonomous vehicles might have, and also points to ways that a protocol deliberately using misdirection can gain ecologically valid reactions from study participants.

References

  1. Alpern, M., & Minardo, K. (2003). Developing a car gesture interface for use as a secondary task. In Extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (CHI'03), 932--933. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Baltodano, S., Sibi, S., Martelaro, N., Gowda, N., & Ju, W.(2015). RRADS: Real Road Autonomous Driving Simulation. In Extended Abstracts of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI'15), 283--284. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Baum, L. F. (1900). The wonderful wizard of Oz. Books of Wonder.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3 (2), 77--101.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Burgess, M., King, N., Harris, M., & Lewis, E. (2013). Electric vehicle drivers' reported interactions with the public: Driving stereotype change? Transportation Research Pt F: Traffic Psychology, 17, 33--44.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Cross, N (1977). The Automated Architect. Pion Limited. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Dahlbäck, N., Jönsson, A., & Ahrenberg, L. (1993). Wizard of Oz studies---why and how. Knowledge-based systems, 6(4), 258--266.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Davies, A. (2015.) I Rode 500 Miles in a Self-Driving Car and Saw the Future. It's Delightfully Dull. Wired.com, January 7, 2025. Available at: http://www.wired.com/2015/01/rode-500-miles-self-driving-car-saw-future-boring/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. J. Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107--115.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Fels, S., Hausch, R., & Tang, A. (2006). Investigation of haptic feedback in the driver seat. In IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference (ITSC'06), 584--589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Fitch, G. M., Kiefer, R. J., Hankey, J. M., & Kleiner, B. M.(2007). Toward developing an approach for alerting drivers to the direction of a crash threat. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(4), 710--720.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Fitch, G. M., Hankey, J. M., Kleiner, B. M., & Dingus, T. A.(2011). Driver comprehension of multiple haptic seat alerts intended for use in an integrated collision avoidance system. Transportation Research part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 14(4), 278--290.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Geiger, M., Nieschulz, R., Zobl, M., Neuss, R., & Lang, M.(2001). Methods for Facilitation of Wizard-of-Oz Studies and Data Acquisition. In Proc. of the 9th Intl. Conf. on Human-Computer Interaction (HCI International 2001), New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 5(10), 8--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Geutner, P., Steffens, F., & Manstetten, D. (2002). Design of the VICO Spoken Dialogue System: Evaluation of User Expectations by Wizard-of-Oz Experiments. In Proc. Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'02). 1588--1593.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Green, P., Boreczky, J., and Kim, S. (1990). Applications of Rapid Prototyping to Control and Display Design. SAE Technical Paper 900470., doi:10.4271/900470.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Hogema, J. H., De Vries, S. C., Van Erp, J., & Kiefer, R. J.(2009). A tactile seat for direction coding in car driving: Field evaluation. In Proc. of IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 2(4), 181--188. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Kelley, J. F. (1983) An empirical methodology for writing user-friendly natural language computer applications. Proceedings of ACM Human Factors in Computing systems (CHI'83), 193--196. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Kelley, J. F. (1985). CAL -- A Natural Language program developed with the OZ Paradigm: Implications for Supercomputing Systems".." In Proceedings of ACM First International Conference on Supercomputing Systems. 238--248.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Lathrop, B., Cheng, H., Weng, F., Mishra, R., Chen, J., Bratt, H., & Shriberg, L. (2005). A Wizard of Oz framework for collecting spoken human-computer dialogs: An experiment procedure for the design and testing of natural language in-vehicle technology systems. In Proc. 12th World Congress on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS'05), 12(6) 3298--307.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Morrell, J., & Wasilewski, K. (2010). Design and evaluation of a vibrotactile seat to improve spatial awareness while driving. In Proc. IEEE Haptics Symposium, 281--288. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Schmidt, G., Kiss, M., Babbel, E., & Galla, A. (2008). The Wizard on Wheels: Rapid Prototyping and User Testing of Future Driver Assistance Using Wizard of Oz Technique in a Vehicle. In Proceedings of the FISITA 2008 World Automotive Congress, Munich. F2008-02-001Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Schuller, B., Lang, M., & Rigoll, G. (2006). Recognition of spontaneous emotions by speech within automotive environment. Fortschritte der Akustik (DAGA'06), 32(1), 57--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Talone, A., Fincannon, T., Schuster, D., Jentsch, F. and Hudson, I. (2013). Comparing Physical and Virtual Simulation Use in UGV Research. Proc. of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES'13), 57(1), 2017--202.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. The RRADS platform: a real road autonomous driving simulator

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      AutomotiveUI '15: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications
      September 2015
      338 pages
      ISBN:9781450337366
      DOI:10.1145/2799250

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 September 2015

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      AutomotiveUI '15 Paper Acceptance Rate38of80submissions,48%Overall Acceptance Rate248of566submissions,44%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader