Augmented Reality Interface Design for Autonomous Driving

Raissa Pokam Meguia, Christine Chauvin, Serge Debernard


How well should an interface be designed in order to meet the information needs of the user? The answer to this question is a great challenge in intelligent systems, particularly in highly automated vehicles. In this paper, we present our PhD work advance in interface design, for autonomous vehicles of level 3, with a cutting-edge technology, Augmented Reality. We present the criticality of an adaptive interface to enhance driver/autonomous system interactions. We describe the methodology we have adopted for defining information needs and conveying them at the right time and in the shape to the driver. Then, we present the actual stage of the work. Finally, we report on the expected outcome of the whole research project.


  1. Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence, 6(4), 355-385.
  2. Burns, C. M., & Hajdukiewicz, J. (2013). Ecological. interface design. CRC Press.
  3. Hendricks, D. L. (1994). Examination of lane change crashes and potential IVHS countermeasures (DOT HS 808 071) Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Available online at:\JPODOCS\REPTS_ TE/61B01!.PDF.
  4. Elix, B., & Naikar, N. E. E. L. A. M. (2008) Designing safe and effective future systems: A new approach for modelling decisions in future systems with Cognitive Work Analysis. In Proceedings of the 8th international symposium of the Australian Aviation Psychology Association.
  5. Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37(1), 32-64.
  6. Endsley, M.R., & Kaber, D.B; (1999). Level of Automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in dynamic control task.
  7. Jenkins, D. P., Stanton, N. A., Salmon, P. M., Walker, G. H., & Rafferty, L. (2010). Using the decision-ladder to add a formative element to naturalistic decision-making research. Intl. Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 26(2-3), 132-146.
  8. Gasser, T., & Westhoff, D. (2012, July). BASt-study: Definitions of automation and legal issues in Germany. In Presentation at the Road Vehicle Automation Workshop.
  9. Habenicht, S., Winner, H., Bone, S., Sasse, F., & Korzenietz, P. (2011, June). A maneuver-based lane change assistance system. In Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2011 IEEE (pp. 375-380). IEEE.
  10. Hetrick, S. (1997). Examination of driver lane change behavior and the potential effectiveness of warning onset rules for lane change or "side" crash avoidance systems. Unpublished master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia. Available on-line at: 382915749731261/unrestricted/etd.pdf.
  11. Lee, S. E., Olsen, E. C., & Wierwille, W. W. (2004). A comprehensive examination of naturalistic lane changes (No. HS-809 702,).
  12. Marinik, A., Bishop, R., Fitchett, V., Morgan, J. F., Trimble, T. E., & Blanco, M. (2014, July). Human factors evaluation of level 2 and level 3 automated driving concepts: Concepts of operation. (Report No. DOT HS 812 044). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
  13. Michon, J. A. (1985). A critical view of driver behavior models: what do we know, what should we do?. In Human behavior and traffic safety (pp. 485-524). Springer US.
  14. Naikar, N. (2013). Work domain analysis: Concepts, guidelines, and cases. CRC Press. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. (2013). Preliminary statement of policy concerning automated vehicles. Washington, DC.
  15. Olsen Erik (2003). Modeling Slow Lead Vehicle. Changing. Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor of philosophy in Industrial and Systems Engineering. 22 September 2003, Blacksburg, Virginia. Available at: etd12032003152916/unrestricted/olsen_dissertation.pdf.
  16. Riley, V. (1989, October). A general model of mixed. initiative human-machine systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 124-128). SAGE Publications.
  17. Sheridan, T. B., & Verplank, W. (1978). Human and Computer Control of Undersea Teleoperators. Cambridge, MA: MA: Man-Machine Systems Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, MIT.
  18. Sheridan, T. B., & Parasuraman, R. (2005). Human automation interaction.Reviews of human factors and ergonomics, 1(1), 89-129.
  19. Shinar, D. (1978). Psychology on the Road: The Human Factor in Traffic Safety. New York: Wiley.
  20. Smith, J., 1998. The book, The publishing company London, 2nd edition.
  21. Tijerina, L., Garrott, R, W., Glecker, M., Stoltzfus, D., & Parmer, E. (1997, November 3). Van and passenger car driver eye glance behavior during lane change decision phase (Revised DRAFT: INTERIM REPORT). Transportation Research Center, Inc. and National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, Vehicle Research and Test Center.
  22. Van Winsum, W. (1999). The human element in car following models. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour, 2(4), 207-211.

Paper Citation

in Harvard Style

Pokam Meguia R., Chauvin C. and Debernard S. (2015). Augmented Reality Interface Design for Autonomous Driving . In Doctoral Consortium - DCINCO, (ICINCO 2015) ISBN , pages 22-33. DOI: 10.5220/0005578800220033

in Bibtex Style

author={Raissa Pokam Meguia and Christine Chauvin and Serge Debernard},
title={Augmented Reality Interface Design for Autonomous Driving},
booktitle={Doctoral Consortium - DCINCO, (ICINCO 2015)},

in EndNote Style

JO - Doctoral Consortium - DCINCO, (ICINCO 2015)
TI - Augmented Reality Interface Design for Autonomous Driving
SN -
AU - Pokam Meguia R.
AU - Chauvin C.
AU - Debernard S.
PY - 2015
SP - 22
EP - 33
DO - 10.5220/0005578800220033