Real-Time Estimation of Drivers' Trust in Automated Driving Systems

Trust miscalibration issues, represented by undertrust and overtrust, hinder the interaction between drivers and self-driving vehicles. A modern challenge for automotive engineers is to avoid these trust miscalibration issues through the development of techniques for measuring drivers' trust in the automated driving system during real-time applications execution. One possible approach for measuring trust is through modeling its dynamics and subsequently applying classical state estimation methods. This paper proposes a framework for modeling the dynamics of drivers' trust in automated driving systems and also for estimating these varying trust levels. The estimation method integrates sensed behaviors (from the driver) through a Kalman lter-based approach. The sensed behaviors include eye-tracking signals, the usage time of the system, and drivers' performance on a non-driving-related task (NDRT). We conducted a study (n = 80) with a simulated SAE level 3 automated driving system, and analyzed the factors that impacted drivers' trust in the system. Data from the user study were also used for the identi cation of the trust model parameters. Results show that the proposed approach was successful in computing trust estimates over successive interactions between the driver and the automated driving system. These results encourage the use of strategies for modeling and estimating trust in automated driving systems. Such trust measurement technique paves a path for the design of trust-aware automated driving systems capable of changing their behaviors to control drivers' trust levels to mitigate both undertrust and overtrust.National Science FoundationBrazilian Army's Department of Science and TechnologyAutomotive Research Center (ARC) at the University of MichiganU.S. Army CCDC/GVSC (government contract DoD-DoA W56HZV14-2-0001).Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/162572/1/Azevedo Sa et al. 2020.pdfSEL

Assessing L2 Argumentation in the UAE Context

In this rapidly changing world, argumentation and critical thinking skills are undeniably crucial for new generations of Emirati students. These skills lay the groundwork for a competitive economy, which is a priority for the UAE in its Vision 2021. Specifically, today’s modern workplaces require workers to evaluate different propositions and develop their own after weighing up these various ideas, and thus the ability to defend arguments in English has become increasingly important for UAE university students in English-medium universities as well as their future professional contexts. Despite this importance, research regarding argumentation and the related critical thinking skills is sorely lacking in the UAE. This chapter delineates how written argumentation was assessed in a timed essay in a mandatory argumentative writing course taken by university freshmen in a government university in the UAE, and how the feedback gleaned from this common assessment was mapped to the teaching curriculum to shed light on the teaching effectiveness and to provide directions for future teaching

Error Type, Risk, Performance, and Trust: Investigating the Different Impacts of false alarms and misses on Trust and Performance

Semi-autonomous vehicles are intended to give drivers multitasking flexibility and to improve driving safety. Yet, drivers have to trust the vehicle’s autonomy to fully leverage the vehicle’s capability. Prior research on driver’s trust in a vehicle’s autonomy has normally assumed that the autonomy was without error. Unfortunately, this may be at times an unrealistic assumption. To address this shortcoming, we seek to examine the impacts of automation errors on the relationship between drivers’ trust in automation and their performance on a non-driving secondary task. More specifically, we plan to investigate false alarms and misses in both low and high risk conditions. To accomplish this, we plan to utilize a 2 (risk conditions) × 4 (alarm conditions) mixed design. The findings of this study are intended to inform Autonomous Driving Systems (ADS) designers by permitting them to appropriately tune the sensitivity of alert systems by understanding the impacts of error type and varying risk conditions.This research is supported in part by the Automotive Research Center (ARC) at the University of Michigan, with funding from government contract DoD-DoA W56HZV-14-2-0001, through the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command (CCDC)/Ground Vehicle Systems Center (GVSC).Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/149648/1/GVSETS 2019_FinalPaper.pdfDescription of GVSETS 2019_FinalPaper.pdf : Main Fil

Comparing the Effects of False Alarms and Misses on Humans’ Trust in (Semi)Autonomous Vehicles

Trust in automated driving systems is crucial for effective driver- (semi)autonomous vehicles interaction. Drivers that do not trust the system appropriately are not able to leverage its benefits. This study presents a mixed design user experiment where participants conducted a non-driving task while traveling in a simulated semi-autonomous vehicle with forward collision alarm and emergency braking functions. Occasionally, the system missed obstacles or provided false alarms.We varied these system error types as well as road shapes, and measured the effects of these variations on trust development. Results reveal that misses are more harmful to trust development than false alarms, and that these effects are strengthened by operation on risky roads. Our findings provide additional insight into the development of trust in automated driving systems, and are useful for the design of such technologies.Automotive Research Center at the University of Michigan, through the U.S. Army CCDC/GVSCPeer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/153524/1/Azevedo-Sa et al. 2020.pdfDescription of Azevedo-Sa et al. 2020.pdf : Mainfil

Adherence to self-administered tuberculosis treatment in a high HIV-prevalence setting: a cross-sectional survey in Homa Bay, Kenya.

Good adherence to treatment is crucial to control tuberculosis (TB). Efficiency and feasibility of directly observed therapy (DOT) under routine program conditions have been questioned. As an alternative, Médecins sans Frontières introduced self-administered therapy (SAT) in several TB programs. We aimed to measure adherence to TB treatment among patients receiving TB chemotherapy with fixed dose combination (FDC) under SAT at the Homa Bay district hospital (Kenya). A second objective was to compare the adherence agreement between different assessment tools

A phase I/II study of gemcitabine and fractionated cisplatin in an outpatient setting using a 21-day schedule in patients with advanced and metastatic bladder cancer

A randomised phase III trial of MVAC (methotrexate, vincristine, doxorubicin, cisplatin) vs gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) (G 1000 mg m(-2) days 1, 8, and 15 plus C 70 mg m(-2) day 2, q 4 wks) indicated GC had similar efficacy and lower toxicity (JCO 2000). Significant haematologic toxicities in the GC arm occurred on day 15, necessitating dose adjustments in 37% of cycles. We conducted a phase I/II dose escalation trial using GC on a 21-day cycle, with G and C split between days 1 and 8. The objective of the study to define maximum-tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), objective response rate, and overall survival. In all, 32 patients with locally advanced, relapsed, or metastatic disease received: dose level 1, G/C 1000/35; level 2, 1100/35; level 3, 1200/35; level 4, 1200/45 mg m(-2) (G and C given on days 1 and 8 every 3 wks). A total of 19 patients had glomerular filtration rate <60 ml min(-1) and 19 patients had metastatic disease. Dose-limiting toxicity was haematologic (grade 4 thrombocytopenia) at dose level 2. Of 151 cycles, at day 15, platelets were <100 in 61 cycles; neutrophils <0.5, platelets <50 in 26 cycles. Only seven cycles were deferred due to haematological toxicity; four for renal toxicity (chemotherapy instituted posthydration). Overall response rate was 65.5% on an intention-to-treat analysis (75% [21/28] for assessable patients), with four complete responses (12.5%) and 17 partial responses (53%). After the median follow-up of 17.2 months (range 13.1-32.4 months), 12 patients remain alive. The overall median survival was 16 months (range 10.1-26.6 months). G plus C every 3 weeks is active and well tolerated in an outpatient setting, even in patients receiving prior platinum-based regimens and with poor renal reserve

Endogenous sex hormones and prostate cancer: a quantitative review of prospective studies

This paper presents a quantitative review of the data from eight prospective epidemiological studies, comparing mean serum concentrations of sex hormones in men who subsequently developed prostate cancer with those in men who remained cancer free. The hormones reviewed have been postulated to be involved in the aetiology of prostate cancer: androgens and their metabolites testosterone (T), non-SHBG-bound testosterone (non-SHBG-bound T), di-hydrotestosterone (DHT), androstanediol glucuronide (A-diol-g), androstenedione (A-dione), dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate (DHEAS), sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG), the oestrogens, oestrone and oestradiol, luteinizing hormone (LH) and prolactin. The ratio of the mean hormone concentration in prostate cancer cases to that of controls (and its 95% confidence interval (CI)) was calculated for each study, and the results summarized by calculating the weighted average of the log ratios. No differences in the average concentrations of the hormones were found between prostate cancer cases and controls, with the possible exception of A-diol-g which exhibited a 5% higher mean serum concentration among cases relative to controls (ratio 1.05, 95% CI 1.00-1.11), based on 644 cases and 1048 controls. These data suggest that there are no large differences in circulating hormones between men who subsequently go on to develop prostate cancer and those who remain free of the disease. Further research is needed to substantiate the small difference found in A-diol-g concentrations between prostate cancer cases and controls