The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparing State-of-the-Art and Emerging Augmented Reality Interfaces for Autonomous Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication
Open accessAbstract
Providing pedestrians and other vulnerable road users with a clear indication about a fully autonomous vehicle status and intentions is crucial to make them coexist. In the last few years, a variety of external interfaces have been proposed, leveraging different paradigms and technologies including vehicle-mounted devices (like LED panels), short-range on-road projections, and road infrastructure interfaces (e.g., special asphalts with embedded displays). These designs were experimented in different settings, using mockups, specially prepared vehicles, or virtual environments, with heterogeneous evaluation metrics. Promising interfaces based on Augmented Reality (AR) have been proposed too, but their usability and effectiveness have not been tested yet. This paper aims to complement such body of literature by presenting a comparison of state-of-the-art interfaces and new designs under common conditions. To this aim, an immersive Virtual Reality-based simulation was developed, recreating a well-known scenario represented by pedestrians crossing in urban environments under non-regulated conditions. A user study was then performed to investigate the various dimensions of vehicle-to-pedestrian interaction leveraging objective and subjective metrics. Even though no interface clearly stood out over all the considered dimensions, one of the AR designs achieved state-of-the-art results in terms of safety and trust, at the cost of higher cognitive effort and lower intuitiveness compared to LED panels showing anthropomorphic features. Together with rankings on the various dimensions, indications about advantages and drawbacks of the various alternatives that emerged from this study could provide important information for next developments in the field.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“In V2P communication, the latency requirements are typically higher than in V2V communication in hundreds of milliseconds.”
From Towards 6G V2X Sidelink: Survey of Resource Allocation—Mathematical Formulations, Challenges, and Proposed Solutions (2024) · cites this paper as [128]
In the citing paper
“The reliability requirements are similar to V2V communication, i.e., the packet error rate (PER) should be meager, in the order of 10 -5 to 10 -6 .”
From Towards 6G V2X Sidelink: Survey of Resource Allocation—Mathematical Formulations, Challenges, and Proposed Solutions (2024) · cites this paper as [128]
Citations
Cites
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003
SUS: A 'Quick and Dirty' Usability Scale
(1996) · Usability Evaluation In Industry · doi:10.1201/9781498710411-35 · Cited by 8,989
Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness
Kennedy, R. S., Lane, N. E., Berbaum, K. S., & Lilienthal, M. G. (1993) · The International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3 · Cited by 5,457
AirSim: High-Fidelity Visual and Physical Simulation for Autonomous Vehicles
Shah, S., Dey, D., Lovett, C., & Kapoor, A. (2018) · Springer Proceedings in Advanced Robotics · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-67361-5_40 · Cited by 2,254
Foundations for an Empirically Determined Scale of Trust in Automated Systems
Jian, J.-Y., Bisantz, A. M., & Drury, C. G. (2000) · International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics · doi:10.1207/s15327566ijce0401_04 · Cited by 1,799
Research works printed but not linked: 31
- 10.9781/ijimai.2017.09.001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/3122986.3122995 · DOI
- 10.1145/3004323.3004324 · DOI
- 10.1177/001872087101300104 · DOI
- 10.1109/TVCG.2020.3032440 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0003-6870(98)00047-7 · DOI
- löcken, 0, Proc 11th Int Conf Automot User Interfaces Interactive Veh Appl, 262
- 10.1145/3342197.3344543 · DOI
- 10.4271/2017-01-0075 · DOI
- 10.1145/2974804.2974833 · DOI
- 10.1145/3342197.3344546 · DOI
- 10.1145/3131726.3131765 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.trf.2018.08.016 · DOI
- 10.1145/3236112.3236148 · DOI
- 10.1109/COMST.2018.2888904 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-319-60928-7_38 · DOI
- 10.1109/TII.2019.2946626 · DOI
- 10.1109/TITS.2019.2901817 · DOI
- 10.1109/TVT.2019.2933601 · DOI
- 10.1145/3239060.3239082 · DOI
- 10.1145/3122986.3122989 · DOI
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01336 · DOI
- 10.1109/TVT.2016.2553182 · DOI
- 10.1177/0018720819836343 · DOI
- 10.1145/3349263.3351511 · DOI
- 10.1026//1617-6383.15.2.69 · DOI
- 10.1109/IVS.2019.8814030 · DOI
- 10.1037/0022-3514.86.5.680 · DOI
- 10.1109/MVT.2015.2481558 · DOI
- 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00055-X · DOI
- 10.1145/3173574.3174003 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Annu, & Rajalakshmi, P. (2024) · IEEE Open Journal of Vehicular Technology · doi:10.1109/ojvt.2024.3368240 · Cited by 73
Metadata
- Authors
- Prattico, F. G., Lamberti, F., Cannavo, A., Morra, L., & Montuschi, P.
- Affiliations
- Politecnico di Torino (IT)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology
- Published
- 2021-02
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1157-1168
- ISSN
- 0018-9545 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-9359
- OpenAlex
- W3122940095
- Cited by
- 59
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4
- FWCI
- 10.29
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- PORTO@Iris (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- VR@POLITO initiative
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Traffic and Road Safety
- Keywords
- augmented reality interfaces, autonomous vehicles, vehicle-to-pedestrian communication, pedestrian safety, vulnerable road users, LED panels, virtual reality simulation, user study, trust in autonomous vehicles, cognitive effort, intuitiveness
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing State-of-the-Art and Emerging Augmented Reality Interfaces for Autonomous Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tvt.2021.3054312
- The paper
- Prattico, F. G., Lamberti, F., Cannavo, A., Morra, L., & Montuschi, P. (2021). Comparing State-of-the-Art and Emerging Augmented Reality Interfaces for Autonomous Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology. https://doi.org/10.1109/tvt.2021.3054312