Knowing me, knowing you-A study on top-down requirements for compensatory scanning in drivers with homonymous visual field loss.

OBJECTIVE: It is currently still unknown why some drivers with visual field loss can compensate well for their visual impairment while others adopt ineffective strategies. This paper contributes to the methodological investigation of the associated top-down mechanisms and aims at validating a theoretical model on the requirements for successful compensation among drivers with homonymous visual field loss. METHODS: A driving simulator study was conducted with eight participants with homonymous visual field loss and eight participants with normal vision. Participants drove through an urban surrounding and experienced a baseline scenario and scenarios with visual precursors indicating increased likelihoods of crossing hazards. Novel measures for the assessment of the mental model of their visual abilities, the mental model of the driving scene and the perceived attention demand were developed and used to investigate the top-down mechanisms behind attention allocation and hazard avoidance. RESULTS: Participants with an overestimation of their visual field size tended to prioritize their seeing side over their blind side both in subjective and objective measures. The mental model of the driving scene showed close relations to the subjective and actual attention allocation. While participants with homonymous visual field loss were less anticipatory in their usage of the visual precursors and showed poorer performances compared to participants with normal vision, the results indicate a stronger reliance on top-down mechanism for drivers with visual impairments. A subjective focus on the seeing side or on near peripheries more frequently led to bad performances in terms of collisions with crossing cyclists. CONCLUSION: The study yielded promising indicators for the potential of novel measures to elucidate top-down mechanisms in drivers with homonymous visual field loss. Furthermore, the results largely support the model of requirements for successful compensatory scanning. The findings highlight the importance of individualized interventions and driver assistance systems tailored to address these mechanisms.

Investigating Differences in Behavior and Brain in Human-Human and Human-Autonomous Vehicle Interactions in Time-Critical Situations.

Some studies provide evidence that humans could actively exploit the alleged technological advantages of autonomous vehicles (AVs). This implies that humans may tend to interact differently with AVs as compared to human driven vehicles (HVs) with the knowledge that AVs are programmed to be risk-averse. Hence, it is important to investigate how humans interact with AVs in complex traffic situations. Here, we investigated whether participants would value interactions with AVs differently compared to HVs, and if these differences can be characterized on the behavioral and brain-level. We presented participants with a cover story while recording whole-head brain activity using fNIRS that they were driving under time pressure through urban traffic in the presence of other HVs and AVs. Moreover, the AVs were programmed defensively to avoid collisions and had faster braking reaction times than HVs. Participants would receive a monetary reward if they managed to finish the driving block within a given time-limit without risky driving maneuvers. During the drive, participants were repeatedly confronted with left-lane turning situations at unsignalized intersections. They had to stop and find a gap to turn in front of an oncoming stream of vehicles consisting of HVs and AVs. While the behavioral results did not show any significant difference between the safety margin used during the turning maneuvers with respect to AVs or HVs, participants tended to be more certain in their decision-making process while turning in front of AVs as reflected by the smaller variance in the gap size acceptance as compared to HVs. Importantly, using a multivariate logistic regression approach, we were able to predict whether the participants decided to turn in front of HVs or AVs from whole-head fNIRS in the decision-making phase for every participant (mean accuracy = 67.2%, SD = 5%). Channel-wise univariate fNIRS analysis revealed increased brain activation differences for turning in front of AVs compared to HVs in brain areas that represent the valuation of actions taken during decision-making. The insights provided here may be useful for the development of control systems to assess interactions in future mixed traffic environments involving AVs and HVs.

Opportunities and Limitations of a Gaze-Contingent Display to Simulate Visual Field Loss in Driving Simulator Studies.

Background: Research on task performance under visual field loss is often limited due to small and heterogenous samples. Simulations of visual impairments hold the potential to account for many of those challenges. Digitally altered pictures, glasses, and contact lenses with partial occlusions have been used in the past. One of the most promising methods is the use of a gaze-contingent display that occludes parts of the visual field according to the current gaze position. In this study, the gaze-contingent paradigm was implemented in a static driving simulator to simulate visual field loss and to evaluate parallels in the resulting driving and gaze behavior in comparison to patients. Methods: The sample comprised 15 participants without visual impairment. All the subjects performed three drives: with full vision, simulated left-sided homonymous hemianopia, and simulated right-sided homonymous hemianopia, respectively. During each drive, the participants drove through an urban environment where they had to maneuver through intersections by crossing straight ahead, turning left, and turning right. Results: The subjects reported reduced safety and increased workload levels during simulated visual field loss, which was reflected in reduced lane position stability and greater absence of large gaze movements. Initial compensatory strategies could be found concerning a dislocated gaze position and a distorted fixation ratio toward the blind side, which was more pronounced for right-sided visual field loss. During left-sided visual field loss, the participants showed a smaller horizontal range of gaze positions, longer fixation durations, and smaller saccadic amplitudes compared to right-sided homonymous hemianopia and, more distinctively, compared to normal vision. Conclusion: The results largely mirror reports from driving and visual search tasks under simulated and pathological homonymous hemianopia concerning driving and scanning challenges, initially adopted compensatory strategies, and driving safety. This supports the notion that gaze-contingent displays can be a useful addendum to driving simulator research with visual impairments if the results are interpreted considering methodological limitations and inherent differences to the pathological impairment.

Driver's turning intent recognition model based on brain activation and contextual information.

Traffic situations like turning at intersections are destined for safety-critical situations and accidents. Human errors are one of the main reasons for accidents in these situations. A model that recognizes the driver's turning intent could help to reduce accidents by warning the driver or stopping the vehicle before a dangerous turning maneuver. Most models that aim at predicting the probability of a driver's turning intent use only contextual information, such as gap size or waiting time. The objective of this study is to investigate whether the combination of context information and brain activation measurements enhances the recognition of turning intent. We conducted a driving simulator study while simultaneously measuring brain activation using high-density fNIRS. A neural network model for turning intent recognition was trained on the fNIRS and contextual data. The input variables were analyzed using SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) feature importance analysis to show the positive effect of the inclusion of brain activation data. Both the model's evaluation and the feature importance analysis suggest that the combination of context information and brain activation leads to an improved turning intent recognition. The fNIRS results showed increased brain activation differences during the "turn" decision-making phase before turning execution in parts of the left motor cortices, such as the primary motor cortex (PMC; putative BA 4), premotor area (PMA; putative BA 6), and supplementary motor area (SMA; putative BA 8). Furthermore, we also observed increased activation differences in the left prefrontal areas, potentially in the left middle frontal gyrus (putative BA 9), which has been associated with the control of executive functions, such as decision-making and action planning. We hypothesize that brain activation measurements could be a more direct indicator with potentially high specificity for the turning behavior and thus help to increase the recognition model's performance.