English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

For adaptive cruise control (ACC) systems to be accepted and used safely, the transitions from cruise control mode to necessary driver intervention need to be obvious to the driver. Previous research shows that drivers have natural boundaries for acceptable values for time headway and time to collision to a car in front, which define at what point they are likely to step on the brake pedal. These boundaries can define an intuitive limit for ACC engagement. However, such boundaries may not be the same for all drivers, and not even for the same driver, whose goals may vary. The present research aimed to measure mental model boundaries in the context of different goals with a motorway cut-in scenario in a driving simulator. Participants drove in three conditions, after being asked to ‘drive safely, ‘drive fuel-efficiently’ and after no specific instructions. The results show that both the safe and eco-driving instructions led drivers to brake at longer safety margins. These findings indicate that, as drivers follow different goals, e.g. as they are reminded to drive safely or eco-friendly, their preferences for operational limits of ACCs may change. This needs to be taken into account for design decisions, e.g. using ‘safe’ and ‘eco’ modes when driving.

ACC design for safety and fuel efficiency: the acceptance of safety margins when adopting different driving styles