Vehicle Automation–Other Road User Communication and Coordination: Theory and Mechanisms
DOI: 10.1109/access.2020.2969233
archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified
Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)
Summary
This paper addresses the critical challenge of communication and coordination between automated vehicles and "incidental users"—pedestrians, cyclists, and other drivers whose goals are not directly supported by the automation. The authors argue that vehicle automation may disrupt established social norms and nonverbal cues that currently facilitate smooth traffic interactions, potentially leading to safety issues, poor acceptance, and increased risk perception. The research is motivated by the need to ensure that automation does not merely prevent collisions but also manages the interdependence and uncertainty inherent in shared road spaces, thereby maintaining trust and tolerance among all road users. The study employs a theoretical review and synthesis of literature from communication theory, robotics, traffic engineering, and human-robot interaction. Rather than presenting new empirical data, the authors construct a conceptual framework to analyze how road users exchange information. They integrate concepts such as "common ground" (shared knowledge and assumptions), joint activity theory, and transactional communication models. The analysis focuses on nonverbal codes—specifically kinesics (movement), proxemics (space), and chronemics (time)—and distinguishes between instrumental behaviors (actions to achieve a goal, like stopping) and communicative behaviors (actions to signal intent, like exaggerated braking). The framework also incorporates technology acceptance models and diffusion of innovations theory to evaluate societal impacts. The findings highlight that effective communication relies on the continuous exchange of signals to build and repair common ground. The authors identify that vehicle motion itself serves as a primary channel for communication, with Time-to-Arrival (TTA) estimates being crucial for pedestrian crossing decisions. They propose that automation should be designed to be "observable and directable" by incorporating communicative aspects into vehicle kinematics, such as using exaggerated or predictable trajectories to signal intent clearly. The paper suggests that coordination devices, such as action modulation and sensorimotor communication, can reduce coordination costs and ambiguity. It concludes that automation must account for the psychological and social aspects of interaction, ensuring that signals are interpretable and align with the expectations of incidental users to mitigate "dread risk" and foster acceptance. The significance of this work lies in its shift from viewing vehicle automation solely through the lens of primary user safety to a broader perspective that includes incidental users. By providing a structured framework for designing communication mechanisms, the paper offers guidance for engineers to create automation that supports natural, smooth negotiations in ambiguous situations. This approach aims to prevent the erosion of social trust and ensure that the integration of automated vehicles into mixed traffic environments is socially acceptable and safe, ultimately supporting the broader adoption of autonomous technology.
Key finding
Road users are sensitive to signals sent through vehicle motion, indicating a need to design vehicle automation kinematics for communication to establish common ground and facilitate coordination.
Methodology
review
Provenance
The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | Crossref | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-05 |
| archive | success | canonical_url | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-06 |
| extract | success | cached | — | — | 3 | 2026-06-10 |
| clean | success | clean | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-07 |
| chunk | success | chunk | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-07 |
| embed | success | embed | Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B | — | 1 | 2026-06-07 |
| enrich | success | semantic_scholar | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-06 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-05 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 15 | 2026-06-11 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-10 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.
- ehmi external hmi
- vru facing ehmi
- signaling behavior
- automation surprise
- automation
- driver vru interaction
Information type
What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).
- Applied Guidance: design guidelines
- Theoretical Contribution: conceptual framework, theory or model