In this short project, I would like to key difference of the relationship among environment, vehicle and people between today and the future and examine the nature of the relationship: communication

The main form of communication in today’s transportation environment is through static visual signages shown to people. This establishes a unidirectional relationship between the environment and the people. Manually driven vehicles, in this context, are fully controlled by people, forming a single entity. The volume of internal communication between the driver and the vehicle is big, but very static as well.

The content of communication between the environment and the driver is mainly about operation, navigation and safety of traffic.

The main difference of the future traffic is that the vehicle functions as a part of the environment, forming a single entity with the environment, not the driver. Although there is massive communication between the environment and the vehicles, it is hidden from everyday users, since it is automated in its operating system. This removes the necessity of people managing operation and navigation, allowing room for the communication to be richer with other content. This relationship is bidirectional in nature, since it understands and provides the transportation needs of people.

The language, on which the communication is based, has also potential to improve. Semiotic signages, by its definition is not limited by one specific sense. The majority of modern signages are only visual based, leaving the other four human senses unutilised. This introduces a complex and unfriendly system, that requires an extensive education, which is against the original feature of well-designed semiotic signs. Haptic and auditory signals are mainly designed for minority group (disabled). The unidirectionality of the system often leads to inefficiency.

There are some technologies that are available now, to improve the communication of traffic.

Firstly, instant phone notification & query can be used for dynamic communication between users and the system. The users can simply request their demand via text message or voice assistant, and the service and details can be provided by the system. This bidirectional communication is much richer and easy. Language barriers can naturally be removed.

Secondly, applying directional auditory and haptic signals as active denial system will dramatically increase the safety for pedestrians. The directional signal will actively deliver warning signals, eliminating the need for pedestrians to look for signs. It also draws instant and instinctive danger-avoidance by bypassing rational thought process and triggering reflex action.

Thirdly, the CAVs and the governing traffic system can influence and manipulate the action of other manually driving cars by strategically applying the “herd behaviour” into the traffic, which requires understanding and prediction of human perception and reaction, ultimately leading to safer and predictable traffic environment for both manual drivers, pedestrians and AV users.

In conclusion, automation and autonomation of vehicles and the system will fundamentally change the relationship between the environment, vehicles and people. The content and the shape of communication between them will also be dramatically different, pre- and post CAV. Due to the shift of perspective of person towards traffic / environment, demands and expectations are going to be accordingly different and ultimately, the system as to acquire capacity to engage richer and more personal bidirectional communication with users.

Socio-cultural expectations:
Relationshp between the Environment, Vehicles and People

Before AV

• The vehicle is a part of the person

• Three key information for a person to process: operation, navigation and safety.

• The vehicle is under full control of the driver. The exchange of information occurs mainly between the environment and the driver. The flow of information is often unidirectional, in the form of semiotic signages (heavily visual).

• Modern vehicles, although it is limited, can perceive the environment through sensors.

CAV

• The vehicle is a part of the environment

• One key information for a person to process: safety (mainly for pedestrians)

• The vehicle is under full control of the connected system (Environment), The digital exchange of information within the system network heavily occurs between the vehicles and the environment, but unperceivable for humans.

• There is richer bidirectional flow of information between the environment (including the vehicle as a part) and the person.

• Expansion of technological application of semiotic signages is desirable

Semiotics
Expansion of signages beyond static and visual

Before AV

• The majority of signages are visual based, utilising only 1/5 of human basic senses. Other forms of communications are mainly designed for minor (disabled) group.

• The flow of information is usually unidirectional and static, which is often inefficient. T

• he language of semiotic signs became so complex and unfriendly, it lost it’s main feature (simple to understand) and requires extensive education.

• Not universal, not quick and not efficient
  

Communication possibilities

Conclusion

• Autonomisation of vehicles and the system that connects them fundemently changes the relationship between the environment, vehicles and people.

• The content and the shape of communication between the environment, vehicles and people are completely different between pre- and post CAV.

• Due to the shift of perspective of person towards vehicle, demands and expectations are accordingly different.