Biblio

In an effort towards predicting mental workload while driving, previous research found interactions between working memory load and visuospatial demands, which complicates the accurate prediction of momentary mental workload. To investigate this interaction, the cognitive concepts working memory load and visuospatial attention were integrated into a cognitive driving model using the cognitive architecture ACT-R. The model was developed to safely drive on a multi-lane highway with ongoing traffic while performing a secondary n-back task using speed signs. To manipulate visuospatial demands, the model must drive through a construction site with reduced lane-width in certain blocks of the experiment. Furthermore, it is able to handle complex driving situations such as overtaking traffic while adjusting the speed according to the n-back task. The behavioral results show a negative effect on driving performance with increasing task difficulty of the secondary task. Additionally, the model indicates an interaction at a common, task-unspecific level.

White paper submitted to German Federal Ministry of Education and Research

Advances in Vehicular Cyber-Physical Systems (VCPS) are the primary enablers of the shift from no automation to fully autonomous vehicles (AVs). One of the impacts of this shift is to develop safe AVs in which most or all of the functions of the human driver are replaced with an intelligent system. However, while some progress has been made in equipping AVs with advanced AI capabilities, VCPS designers are still faced with the challenge of designing trustworthy AVs that are in sync with the unpredictable behaviours of humans. In order to address this challenge, we present a model that describes how a Human Ambassador component can be integrated into the overall design of a new generation of VCPS. A scenario is presented to demonstrate how the model can work in practice. Formalisation and co-simulation challenges associated with integrating the Human Ambassador component and future work we are undertaking are also discussed.

Accountability is an often called for property of technical systems. It is a requirement for algorithmic decision systems, autonomous cyber-physical systems, and for software systems in general. As a concept, accountability goes back to the early history of Liberalism and is suggested as a tool to limit the use of power. This long history has also given us many, often slightly differing, definitions of accountability. The problem that software developers now face is to understand what accountability means for their systems and how to reflect it in a system's design. To enable the rigorous study of accountability in a system, we need models that are suitable for capturing such a varied concept. In this paper, we present a method to express and compare different definitions of accountability using Structural Causal Models. We show how these models can be used to evaluate a system's design and present a small use case based on an autonomous car.

Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI), i.e., the development of more transparent and interpretable AI models, has gained increased traction over the last few years. This is due to the fact that, in conjunction with their growth into powerful and ubiquitous tools, AI models exhibit one detrimental characteristic: a performance-transparency trade-off. This describes the fact that the more complex a model's inner workings, the less clear it is how its predictions or decisions were achieved. But, especially considering Machine Learning (ML) methods like Reinforcement Learning (RL) where the system learns autonomously, the necessity to understand the underlying reasoning for their decisions becomes apparent. Since, to the best of our knowledge, there exists no single work offering an overview of Explainable Reinforcement Learning (XRL) methods, this survey attempts to address this gap. We give a short summary of the problem, a definition of important terms, and offer a classification and assessment of current XRL methods. We found that a) the majority of XRL methods function by mimicking and simplifying a complex model instead of designing an inherently simple one, and b) XRL (and XAI) methods often neglect to consider the human side of the equation, not taking into account research from related fields like psychology or philosophy. Thus, an interdisciplinary effort is needed to adapt the generated explanations to a (non-expert) human user in order to effectively progress in the field of XRL and XAI in general.

Drivers with visual field loss show a heterogeneous driving performance due to the varying ability to compensate for their perceptual deficits. This paper presents a theoretical investigation of the factors that determine the development of adaptive scanning strategies. The application of the Saliency-Effort-Expectancy-Value (SEEV) model to the use case of homonymous hemianopia in intersections indicates that a lack of guidance and a demand for increased gaze movements in the blind visual field aggravates scanning. The adaptation of the scanning behavior to these challenges consequently requires the presence of adequate mental models of the driving scene and of the individual visual abilities. These factors should be considered in the development of assistance systems and trainings for visually impaired drivers.