ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2018
Using Smartbands, Pupillometry and Body Motion to Detect Discomfort in Automated Driving.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Towards Safe and Comfortable Vehicle Control Transitions: A Systematic Review of Takeover Time, Time Budget, and Takeover Outcomes.Human factors · 2026Pooled it
- Towards Mindless Stress Regulation in Advanced Driver Assistance Systems: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychology · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- A Teenager Physical Fitness Evaluation Model Based on 1D-CNN with LSTM and Wearable Running PPG Recordings.Biosensors · 2022Article
- Detecting driver stress and hazard anticipation using real-time cardiac measurement: A simulator study.Brain and behavior · 2022Article
- [Subjective certainty to increase the acceptance of automated and connected driving].Forschung im ingenieurwesen · 2021Article
- Unobtrusive Health Monitoring in Private Spaces: The Smart Vehicle.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As technological advances lead to rapid progress in driving automation, human-machine interaction (HMI) issues such as comfort in automated driving gain increasing attention. The research project KomfoPilot at Chemnitz University of Technology aims to assess discomfort in automated driving using physiological parameters from commercially available smartbands, pupillometry and body motion. Detected discomfort should subsequently be used to adapt driving parameters as well as information presentation and prevent potentially safety-critical take-over situations. In an empirical driving simulator study, 40 participants from 25 years to 84 years old experienced two highly automated drives with three potentially critical and discomfort-inducing approaching situations in each trip. The ego car drove in a highly automated mode at 100 km/h and approached a truck driving ahead with a constant speed of 80 km/h. Automated braking started very late at a distance of 9 m, reaching a minimum of 4.2 m. Perceived discomfort was assessed continuously using a handset control. Physiological parameters were measured by the smartband Microsoft Band 2 and included heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV) and skin conductance level (SCL). Eye tracking glasses recorded pupil diameter and eye blink frequency; body motion was captured by a motion tracking system and a seat pressure mat. Trends of all parameters were analyzed 10 s before, during and 10 s after reported discomfort to check for overall parameter relevance, direction and strength of effects; timings of increase/decrease; variability as well as filtering, standardization and artifact removal strategies to increase the signal-to-noise ratio. Results showed a reduced eye blink rate during discomfort as well as pupil dilation, also after correcting for ambient light influence. Contrary to expectations, HR decreased significantly during discomfort periods, whereas HRV diminished as expected. No effects could be observed for SCL. Body motion showed the expected pushback movement during the close approach situation. Overall, besides SCL, all other parameters showed changes associated with discomfort indicated by the handset control. The results serve as a basis for designing and configuring a real-time discomfort detection algorithm that will be implemented in the driving simulator and validated in subsequent studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.