Method and device for evaluating interactive usability of vehicle-mounted central control screen of commercial vehicle and medium

Abstract

The invention provides an interactive usability evaluation method and device for a vehicle-mounted central control screen of a commercial vehicle and a medium, and relates to the technical field of intelligent cabin evaluation. The method comprises the following steps: aiming at the vehicle-mounted central control screen, constructing a plurality of scene test cases, a plurality of subjective and objective evaluation indexes for representing the interaction usability of the vehicle-mounted central control screen, and an interaction usability evaluation model of the vehicle-mounted central control screen; based on a driver in-the-loop simulation platform and in combination with various scene test cases, carrying out an interactive usability test on the vehicle-mounted central control screen to obtain evaluation scores of subjective and objective evaluation indexes; and based on the evaluation score of each evaluation index, determining the weight of each evaluation index through an entropy weight method, and calculating the interaction usability score of the vehicle-mounted central control screen according to the evaluation score and the weight of each evaluation index and the interaction usability evaluation model.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of smart cockpit evaluation, and in particular to a method for evaluating the interactive usability of a central control screen on an operating vehicle, a computer device, and a readable storage medium. Background Art

[0002] With the rapid development of intelligent connected vehicle technology, the in-vehicle central control screen, as the core hub of human-computer interaction, undertakes key functions such as navigation, entertainment, vehicle control, and driver assistance information display. The usability of its interactive design directly affects the driver's cognitive load, operational efficiency, and driving safety. Therefore, establishing a scientific and comprehensive evaluation method for the usability of in-vehicle central control screen interaction is of great significance for optimizing the human-computer interaction experience and improving driving safety.

[0003] In related technologies, research has been conducted on the evaluation of the interactive usability of in-vehicle central control screens. However, the research objects in related technologies are mainly passenger cars. The design of passenger car in-vehicle central control screens is based on urban road conditions, focusing on interface aesthetics and the smoothness of entertainment functions. However, large and heavy-duty commercial vehicles used for passenger and freight transportation are production tools with long operating times and complex operating environments. The central control screens need to frequently access vehicle status monitoring functions such as load and braking systems, and display complex driving data in real time, which places higher requirements on information visibility (such as strong light interference resistance) and operational safety (such as anti-accidental touch mechanism). The evaluation methods of related technologies have two limitations: on the one hand, the test scenarios are relatively simple, and most of the user interaction tests are conducted in static or simple dynamic driving scenarios, which cannot represent the actual interactive behavior in complex driving road scenarios; on the other hand, the evaluation indicators are relatively simple, making it difficult to comprehensively and reliably evaluate the interactive usability of in-vehicle central control screens in actual operating scenarios. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of this, the present application provides a method for evaluating the interactive usability of an on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle, a computer device, and a readable storage medium, which solves the problem of poor interactive usability evaluation results of the on-board central control screen in related technologies.

[0005] In a first aspect, an embodiment of the present application provides a method for evaluating the interactive usability of a central control screen on an operating vehicle, comprising:

[0006] For the in-vehicle central control screen, we built multiple scenario test cases, multiple subjective and objective evaluation indicators to characterize the interactive usability of the in-vehicle central control screen, and an interactive usability evaluation model for the in-vehicle central control screen;

[0007] Based on the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and combined with various scenario test cases, we conducted interactive usability tests on the in-vehicle central control screen to obtain subjective and objective evaluation scores.

[0008] Based on the evaluation scores of each evaluation indicator, the weight of each evaluation indicator is determined by the entropy weight method, and the interactive usability score of the vehicle-mounted central control screen is calculated according to the evaluation scores and weights of each evaluation indicator and the interactive usability evaluation model.

[0009] The above method according to the embodiment of the present application may also have the following additional technical features:

[0010] In the above technical solution, optionally, multiple scenario test cases are constructed, including:

[0011] Construct scenario test cases that include complex road types, multiple driving speeds, multiple lighting conditions, and multiple interactive tasks; among them, complex road types include at least two of the following: urban roads, highways, mountain curves, and uphill and downhill sections; multiple lighting conditions include at least two of the following: normal lighting, low lighting, and sudden lighting; multiple interactive tasks include at least two of the following: navigation settings, multimedia settings, air conditioning settings, assisted driving information viewing, and voice command response.

[0012] In any of the above technical solutions, optionally, based on a driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and in combination with multiple scenario test cases, an interactive usability test of the vehicle central control screen is conducted to obtain evaluation scores of subjective and objective evaluation indicators, including:

[0013] Obtain the scenario test case parameters set by the staff through the virtual scenario generation and control system of the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform, and determine the target scenario test case among multiple scenario test cases;

[0014] Conduct interactive usability tests on the in-vehicle central control screen based on target scenario test cases;

[0015] The driver-in-the-loop simulation platform's multi-source data acquisition and synchronization system acquires driver behavior data, central control screen touch data, and environmental data. Based on this data, the objective evaluation index scores are calculated.

[0016] Obtaining the evaluation scores of the subjective evaluation indicators given by the driver;

[0017] Among them, driver behavior data includes eye focus, gaze duration, and scanning path; central control screen touch data includes touch position, touch operation path, touch response time, and number of touch operations; environmental data includes light intensity;

[0018] Objective evaluation indicators include at least one of the following: accidental touch prevention, operation path complexity, visibility of text / icon recognition in strong lighting environments, distraction index under multitasking, and cognitive adaptability;

[0019] Subjective evaluation indicators include at least one of the following: frustration intensity, physical demand, mental demand, gesture coherence, voice response delay, sudden lighting adaptation, and low-light comfort;

[0020] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the anti-accidental touch performance is:

[0021]

[0022] Among them, OI1 represents the anti-false touch performance, t e represents the number of unexpected touch operations, and t represents the number of touch operations;

[0023] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the operation path complexity is:

[0024]

[0025] Among them, OI2 represents the complexity of the operation path, p t represents the theoretical shortest touch operation path length, and p represents the actual touch operation path length;

[0026] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the visibility of text / icon recognition in a strong light environment is:

[0027]

[0028] Among them, OI3 represents the visibility of text / icon recognition in a strong light environment, t f represents the driver's gaze time on the text / icon, a0 represents the driver's gaze time threshold for the text / icon, a1 represents the driver's maximum allowed gaze time for the text / icon, and a2 is the middle value between a0 and a1;

[0029] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the distraction index under multi-tasking is:

[0030]

[0031] Among them, OI4 represents the distraction index under multitasking, t g It is the total time the driver's eyes are off the road, and a4 is the maximum time the driver's eyes are allowed to be off the road;

[0032] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of cognitive adaptability is:

[0033]

[0034] Among them, OI5 represents cognitive adaptability, r f It represents the number of icons correctly identified by the driver in the first test, and r represents the total number of icons that need to be identified in the test.

[0035] In any of the above technical solutions, optionally, based on the evaluation scores of the evaluation indicators, the weights of the evaluation indicators are determined by an entropy weight method, including:

[0036] Construct an evaluation data matrix based on the evaluation scores of subjective evaluation indicators and objective evaluation indicators;

[0037] Perform linear scaling on the evaluation scores of each evaluation indicator in the evaluation data matrix, and perform positive processing on each evaluation score after linear scaling;

[0038] The proportion of each evaluation score after the positive processing is calculated, the information entropy of each evaluation score is calculated according to the proportion, and the weight of each evaluation score is calculated according to the information entropy.

[0039] In any of the above technical solutions, optionally, the number of drivers participating in the test is m, and the number of evaluation indicators involved in the test is n;

[0040] Perform positive processing on each evaluation score after linear scaling, including:

[0041] If the evaluation index score is higher, it means the interactive usability of the vehicle central control screen is better. The evaluation score is processed as follows:

[0042]

[0043] If the evaluation index score is smaller, it means the interactive usability of the vehicle central control screen is better. The evaluation score is processed as follows:

[0044]

[0045] Where x′ ij represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation index of the i-th driver after the positive processing, x ij represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation index of the i-th driver, max(x j ) represents the maximum value among j evaluation scores, min(x j ) represents the minimum value among j evaluation scores;

[0046] The calculation formula for the proportion of evaluation scores is:

[0047]

[0048] Among them, p ij Indicates the proportion of the jth evaluation index under the i-th driver, satisfying

[0049] The calculation formula of the information entropy of the evaluation score is:

[0050]

[0051] Among them, E j represents the information entropy of the jth evaluation index;

[0052] The calculation formula for the evaluation score weight is:

[0053]

[0054] Among them, w j Represents the weight of the jth evaluation index, satisfying E k represents the information entropy of the kth evaluation index;

[0055] The interactive usability evaluation model is:

[0056]

[0057] Among them, U represents the interactive usability score, I j Represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation indicator.

[0058] In a second aspect, an embodiment of the present application provides a computer device comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores programs or instructions that can be run on the processor, and when the programs or instructions are executed by the processor, the steps of the method of the first aspect are implemented.

[0059] In a third aspect, an embodiment of the present application provides a readable storage medium, which stores a program or instruction. When the program or instruction is executed by a processor, the steps of the method of the first aspect are implemented.

[0060] The interactive usability evaluation method, computer equipment and readable storage medium for the on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle in the embodiment of the present application combine multiple subjective and objective evaluation indicators, and take into account quantitative evaluation in complex scenarios such as sudden lighting and multi-task interference, and allocate weights through the entropy weight method, effectively avoiding the subjective bias of human empowerment, and improving the accuracy and objectivity of the interactive usability evaluation of the on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle.

[0061] The above description is only an overview of the technical solution of the present application. In order to more clearly understand the technical means of the present application, it can be implemented in accordance with the contents of the specification. In order to make the above and other purposes, features and advantages of the present application more obvious and easy to understand, the specific implementation methods of the present application are listed below. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0062] The drawings described herein are used to provide a further understanding of the present application and constitute a part of the present application. The illustrative embodiments of the present application and their descriptions are used to explain the present application and do not constitute an improper limitation on the present application. In the drawings:

[0063] Figure 1 A flow chart showing a method for evaluating the interactive usability of a central control screen on a commercial vehicle according to an embodiment of the present application is shown;

[0064] Figure 2 A structural block diagram of a computer device according to an embodiment of the present application is shown. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0065] The following will be combined with the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present application to clearly describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present application. Obviously, the embodiments described are part of the embodiments of the present application, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments in the present application, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field are within the scope of protection of this application.

[0066] The terms "first," "second," and the like in the specification and claims of this application are used to distinguish similar objects, and are not used to describe a specific order or precedence. It should be understood that the terms used in this manner are interchangeable where appropriate, so that the embodiments of this application can be implemented in an order other than that illustrated or described herein, and that the objects distinguished by "first," "second," and the like are generally of the same type, and do not limit the number of objects; for example, the first object can be one or more. In addition, the term "and / or" in the specification and claims refers to at least one of the connected objects, and the character " / " generally indicates that the objects connected are in an "or" relationship.

[0067] Below, in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, the interactive usability evaluation method for the on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle, the computer equipment and the readable storage medium provided in the embodiments of the present application are described in detail through specific embodiments and their application scenarios. In the absence of conflict, the following embodiments and features in the embodiments can be combined with each other.

[0068] This embodiment of the present application provides a method for evaluating the interactive usability of a central control screen mounted on a commercial vehicle, executed by a computer device. It should be emphasized that this application differs from the interactive usability evaluation scheme for central control screens mounted on passenger vehicles. The method for evaluating the interactive usability of a central control screen mounted on a commercial vehicle in this embodiment of the present application is primarily applicable to commercial vehicles and can comprehensively and reliably evaluate the interactive usability of the central control screen mounted on a commercial vehicle in actual operating scenarios.

[0069] like Figure 1 As shown, the method for evaluating the interactive usability of the central control screen of an operating vehicle provided in the embodiment of the present application includes:

[0070] Step 101 : For the vehicle-mounted central control screen, construct multiple scenario test cases, multiple subjective and objective evaluation indicators that characterize the interactive usability of the vehicle-mounted central control screen, and an interactive usability evaluation model for the vehicle-mounted central control screen.

[0071] In this step, based on the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform, interactive test scenarios for the central control screen of commercial vehicles are constructed under various driving environments. Furthermore, subjective and objective evaluation indicators are developed to characterize the interactive usability of the central control screen. Furthermore, an interactive usability evaluation model is constructed to evaluate the interactive usability of the central control screen.

[0072] In one embodiment, the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform includes: a driver simulator, an audio-visual feedback system, a virtual scene generation and control system, and a multi-source data acquisition and synchronization system; wherein, the driver simulator includes the simulator's steering wheel, accelerator / brake pedals, central control screen hardware, etc. The driver simulator is actual hardware and realizes the driver's driving and interaction; the audio-visual feedback system includes a ring screen projection, multi-channel audio, etc., which are used to trigger the driver's multi-sensory interaction. The audio-visual feedback system is an actual component and can simulate a real driving environment; the virtual scene generation and control system supports custom road types, traffic density, lighting conditions, weather interference and other factors for generating scenario test cases; the multi-source data acquisition and synchronization system integrates an eye tracker, touch sensors and CAN bus, etc., for synchronously collecting driver behavior data, central control screen touch data and environmental data at the millisecond level.

[0073] In one embodiment of the present application, constructing multiple scenario test cases includes: constructing scenario test cases including complex road types, multiple driving speeds, multiple lighting conditions, and multiple interactive tasks;

[0074] Among them, complex road types include at least two of the following: urban roads, highways, mountain bends, and uphill and downhill sections; multiple lighting conditions include at least two of the following: normal lighting, low lighting, and sudden lighting; multiple interactive tasks include at least two of the following: navigation settings, multimedia settings, air conditioning settings, assisted driving information viewing, and voice command response.

[0075] In this embodiment, scenario test cases are constructed that include complex road types, various driving speeds, various lighting conditions, and various interactive tasks. The elements specifically include:

[0076] (1) Complex road type S1, including urban roads, highways, mountain curves, uphill and downhill sections, etc.

[0077] (2) Driving speed S2, including 0 km / h, 15 km / h, 35 km / h, 60 km / h, etc.;

[0078] (3) Lighting condition S3, which simulates different lighting conditions through virtual scene generation and control system, including normal lighting, sudden lighting changes (such as entering and exiting a tunnel), and low lighting (<50 lux) scenes;

[0079] (4) Interactive task S4, including navigation settings, multimedia settings, air conditioning settings, assisted driving information viewing, voice command response, etc.

[0080] The embodiment of the present application constructs a complex test scenario that covers factors such as complex road types, multiple vehicle speed conditions, complex lighting, and multi-task interaction. It can better represent the actual working scenarios of operating vehicles, solves the problems of insufficient coverage of traditional real-vehicle test scenarios and one-sided data collection, and further improves the comprehensiveness of the evaluation.

[0081] In one embodiment, the constructed subjective evaluation index includes at least one of the following: frustration intensity, physical demand, mental demand, gesture coherence, voice response delay, sudden illumination adaptability, and low-light comfort.

[0082] In this embodiment, in order to evaluate the usability of the vehicle-mounted central control screen in both subjective and objective dimensions, subjective and objective evaluation indicators are constructed.

[0083] Among them, the subjective evaluation indicators are shown in Table 1, among which: frustration intensity SI1 indicates the driver's negative emotions caused by interface design defects or operational obstacles; physical demand SI2 indicates the driver's physical exertion during interaction; mental demand SI3 indicates the driver's mental exertion during interaction; gesture consistency SI4 indicates the smoothness of central control screen operation; voice response delay SI5 indicates the response speed from the start of voice command to the feedback display on the central control screen; sudden illumination adaptability SI6 indicates the adaptability of the central control screen in scenes with sudden illumination intensity changes; low-light comfort SI7 indicates the driver's subjective comfort feeling in low-light environments at night, taking into account factors such as text / icon contrast and color temperature.

[0084] Table 1 Subjective evaluation indicators

[0085]

[0086] In one embodiment, the objective evaluation index includes at least one of the following: accidental touch prevention, operation path complexity, visibility of text / icon recognition in a bright light environment, distraction index under multitasking, and cognitive adaptability. Icons are controls such as music and air conditioning.

[0087] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the anti-accidental touch performance is:

[0088]

[0089] Among them, OI1 represents the anti-false touch performance, t e represents the number of unexpected touch operations, and t represents the number of touch operations;

[0090] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the operation path complexity is:

[0091]

[0092] Among them, OI2 represents the complexity of the operation path, p t represents the theoretical shortest touch operation path length, and p represents the actual touch operation path length;

[0093] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the visibility of text / icon recognition in a strong light environment is:

[0094]

[0095] Among them, OI3 represents the visibility of text / icon recognition in a strong light environment, t f represents the driver's gaze time on the text / icon (ms), a0 represents the driver's gaze time threshold for the text / icon, a0 can be 1000, a1 represents the driver's maximum allowed gaze time on the text / icon (ms), a1 can be 2500, and a2 is the middle value between a0 and a1, which can be 1500;

[0096] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the distraction index under multi-tasking is:

[0097]

[0098] Among them, OI4 represents the distraction index under multitasking, t g It is the total time (ms) that the driver's eyes are off the road. a4 is the maximum time (ms) that the driver's eyes are allowed to be off the road. a4 can be 3000.

[0099] The calculation formula for the evaluation score of cognitive adaptability is:

[0100]

[0101] Among them, OI5 represents cognitive adaptability, r f The first test is when a driver correctly identifies icons in their first test, and r is the total number of icons required to identify. A driver's first test is when they first participate in the test and use the in-car central control screen.

[0102] Compared with the single indicator in the related technology, the embodiment of the present application constructs multiple subjective and objective evaluation indicators, which can comprehensively and reliably evaluate the interactive usability of the vehicle-mounted central control screen in actual operation scenarios.

[0103] Step 102 : Based on the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and in combination with various scenario test cases, an interactive usability test of the vehicle-mounted central control screen is conducted to obtain evaluation scores of subjective and objective evaluation indicators.

[0104] In this step, based on the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and combined with multiple scenario test cases, the interactive usability test of the in-vehicle central control screen is carried out.

[0105] In one embodiment of the present application, the evaluation indicators include objective evaluation indicators and subjective evaluation indicators. Based on the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and combined with various scenario test cases, the interactive usability test of the vehicle central control screen is conducted to obtain evaluation scores of the subjective and objective evaluation indicators, including:

[0106] Obtain the scenario test case parameters set by the staff through the virtual scenario generation and control system of the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform, and determine the target scenario test case among multiple scenario test cases;

[0107] Conduct interactive usability tests on the in-vehicle central control screen based on target scenario test cases;

[0108] The driver-in-the-loop simulation platform's multi-source data acquisition and synchronization system acquires driver behavior data, central control screen touch data, and environmental data. Based on this data, the objective evaluation index scores are calculated.

[0109] Obtain the evaluation scores of the subjective evaluation indicators given by the driver.

[0110] In one embodiment, the driver behavior data includes line of sight focus, gaze time, and scanning path; the central control screen touch data includes touch position, touch operation path, touch response time, and number of touch operations; and the environmental data includes light intensity.

[0111] In this embodiment, a preset number of test people with uniform distribution are selected, for example, a total of 20 drivers are selected to participate in the test, taking into account factors such as gender, age, height, driving experience, and vision correction status.

[0112] Using the DIL platform's virtual scene generation and control system, staff set scenario test case parameters, including the test road type, driving speed, lighting conditions, and interactive tasks, to determine the target scenario test case. Once the target scenario test case is obtained, the interactive usability test of the in-vehicle central control screen is conducted based on the target scenario test case. The DIL platform's multi-source data acquisition and synchronization system captures driver behavior data (such as eye movement data), central control screen touch data, and environmental data, and then calculates the evaluation scores of the objective evaluation indicators.

[0113] After the test is completed, the driver will fill out a subjective scale, which involves 7 evaluation dimensions. Each dimension has 3 questions and the score ranges from 1 to 10 points, thereby obtaining the evaluation score of the subjective evaluation index.

[0114] The embodiment of the present application reliably implements the test and evaluation of the interactive usability of the on-board central control screen of operating vehicles in complex environments through a virtual-reality combined driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and multiple quantitative indicators that integrate subjective and objective factors.

[0115] Step 103: Based on the evaluation scores of the evaluation indicators, the weights of the evaluation indicators are determined by the entropy weight method, and the interactive usability score of the vehicle-mounted central control screen is calculated according to the evaluation scores and weights of the evaluation indicators and the interactive usability evaluation model.

[0116] In this step, a linear weighted method is proposed to fuse the subjective and objective evaluation indicators and calculate the final interactive usability score of the vehicle central control screen.

[0117] The embodiment of the present application combines multiple subjective and objective evaluation indicators, and takes into account quantitative evaluation in complex scenarios such as sudden lighting and multi-task interference, and allocates weights through the entropy weight method, effectively avoiding the subjective bias of human weighting, and improving the accuracy and objectivity of the evaluation of the interactive usability of the vehicle-mounted central control screen.

[0118] In one embodiment of the present application, based on the evaluation score of each evaluation indicator, the weight of each evaluation indicator is determined by an entropy weight method, including:

[0119] (1) Construct an evaluation data matrix based on the evaluation scores of subjective evaluation indicators and objective evaluation indicators.

[0120] Assume that the number of drivers participating in the test is m, the number of evaluation indicators involved in the test is n, and the evaluation data matrix X is:

[0121]

[0122] Among them, x ij represents the jth evaluation index of the i-th driver.

[0123] (2) Linearly scale the evaluation scores of each evaluation indicator in the evaluation data matrix, and perform positive processing on each evaluation score after linear scaling.

[0124] All subjective and objective evaluation indicators in the evaluation data matrix are linearly scaled to between 0 and 1. All evaluation indicators are positively processed. If the evaluation score of the evaluation indicator is larger, it means the interactive usability is better. The evaluation score is processed as follows:

[0125]

[0126] If the evaluation index score is smaller, it means the interactive usability is better. Then the evaluation score is processed as follows:

[0127]

[0128] Where x′ ij represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation index of the i-th driver after the positive processing, max(x j ) represents the maximum value of all evaluation scores of the jth evaluation index (that is, m evaluation scores), min(x j ) represents the minimum value of all evaluation scores of the j-th evaluation indicator (that is, m evaluation scores).

[0129] (3) Calculate the proportion of each evaluation score after the positive processing, calculate the information entropy of each evaluation score based on the proportion, and calculate the weight of each evaluation score based on the information entropy.

[0130] The calculation formula for the proportion of evaluation scores is:

[0131]

[0132] Among them, p ij Indicates the proportion of the jth evaluation index under the i-th driver, satisfying

[0133] The calculation formula of the information entropy of the evaluation score is:

[0134]

[0135] Among them, E j It represents the information entropy of the j-th evaluation index, and its value range is 0 to 1.

[0136] The calculation formula for the evaluation score weight is:

[0137]

[0138] Among them, w j Represents the weight of the jth evaluation index, satisfying E k Represents the information entropy of the kth evaluation index.

[0139] In one embodiment, the interaction usability score is calculated using the interaction usability evaluation model. That is, the interaction usability score is calculated as follows:

[0140]

[0141] Among them, U represents the interactive usability score, I j Represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation indicator.

[0142] This embodiment of the application addresses the challenges of simple test scenarios and relatively single evaluation indicators in evaluating the interactive usability of central control screens on commercial vehicles. By doing so, a method for evaluating the interactive usability of central control screens on commercial vehicles in complex environments is disclosed. Based on a driver-in-the-loop simulation platform, this method constructs test scenarios including complex driving roads, sudden changes in lighting, and multiple interactive tasks. It further constructs multiple subjective and objective evaluation indicators and determines the weights for each indicator, thus comprehensively and reliably implementing interactive usability testing and evaluation for central control screens on commercial vehicles.

[0143] The present application also provides a computer device, such as Figure 2 As shown, the computer device 200 includes a processor 201 and a memory 202. The memory 202 stores programs or instructions that can be run on the processor 201. When the program or instruction is executed by the processor 201, the various steps of the embodiment of the above-mentioned method for evaluating the interactive usability of the on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle are implemented, and the same technical effect can be achieved. To avoid repetition, they will not be repeated here.

[0144] The memory 202 can be used to store software programs and various data. The memory 202 may mainly include a first storage area for storing programs or instructions and a second storage area for storing data. The first storage area may store an operating system, applications or instructions required for at least one function (such as a sound playback function, an image playback function, etc.). In addition, the memory 202 may include a volatile memory or a non-volatile memory, or the memory 202 may include both volatile and non-volatile memory. The non-volatile memory may be a read-only memory (ROM), a programmable read-only memory (PROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM), an electrically erasable programmable read-only memory (EEPROM), or a flash memory. Volatile memory can be random access memory (RAM), static random access memory (SRAM), dynamic random access memory (DRAM), synchronous dynamic random access memory (SDRAM), double data rate synchronous dynamic random access memory (DDRSDRAM), enhanced synchronous dynamic random access memory (ESDRAM), synchronous link dynamic random access memory (SLDRAM), and direct RAM bus random access memory (DRRAM). The memory 202 in the embodiment of the present application includes but is not limited to these and any other suitable types of memory.

[0145] Processor 201 may include one or more processing units. Optionally, processor 201 integrates an application processor and a modem processor. The application processor primarily handles operations related to the operating system, user interface, and application programs, while the modem processor primarily processes wireless communication signals, such as a baseband processor. It is understood that the modem processor may not be integrated into processor 201.

[0146] An embodiment of the present application also provides a readable storage medium, on which a program or instruction is stored. When the program or instruction is executed by a processor, each process of the above-mentioned embodiment of the method for evaluating the interactive usability of the on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle is implemented, and the same technical effect can be achieved. To avoid repetition, it will not be repeated here.

[0147] It should be noted that, in this article, the terms "comprise", "include" or any other variants thereof are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion, so that a process, method, article or device comprising a series of elements includes not only those elements, but also other elements not explicitly listed, or also includes elements inherent to such process, method, article or device. In the absence of further restrictions, an element defined by the statement "comprises a ..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, article or device comprising the element. In addition, it should be noted that the scope of the methods and devices in the embodiments of the present application is not limited to performing functions in the order shown or discussed, and may also include performing functions in a substantially simultaneous manner or in the opposite order according to the functions involved. For example, the described method may be performed in an order different from that described, and various steps may also be added, omitted, or combined. In addition, the features described with reference to certain examples may be combined in other examples.

[0148] The embodiments of the present application are described above in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, but the present application is not limited to the above-mentioned specific implementation methods. The above-mentioned specific implementation methods are merely illustrative and not restrictive. Under the guidance of this application, ordinary technicians in this field can also make many forms without departing from the purpose of this application and the scope of protection of the claims, all of which are within the protection of this application.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the interactive usability of a central control screen on an operating vehicle, characterized in that: include: For the in-vehicle central control screen, construct multiple scenario test cases, multiple subjective and objective evaluation indicators to characterize the interactive usability of the in-vehicle central control screen, and an interactive usability evaluation model for the in-vehicle central control screen; Based on the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and in combination with a variety of scenario test cases, conduct interactive usability tests on the in-vehicle central control screen to obtain subjective and objective evaluation scores for the evaluation indicators; Based on the evaluation scores of each evaluation indicator, the weight of each evaluation indicator is determined by the entropy weight method, and according to the evaluation scores and weights of each evaluation indicator and the interactive usability evaluation model, the interactive usability score of the vehicle-mounted central control screen is calculated.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Build test cases for various scenarios, including: Construct scenario test cases that include complex road types, multiple driving speeds, multiple lighting conditions, and multiple interactive tasks; among them, complex road types include at least two of the following: urban roads, highways, mountain curves, and uphill and downhill sections; multiple lighting conditions include at least two of the following: normal lighting, low lighting, and sudden lighting; multiple interactive tasks include at least two of the following: navigation settings, multimedia settings, air conditioning settings, assisted driving information viewing, and voice command response.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that Based on the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform and combined with a variety of scenario test cases, the interactive usability test of the vehicle central control screen was conducted to obtain subjective and objective evaluation scores of the evaluation indicators, including: Obtaining scenario test case parameters set by a staff member through a virtual scenario generation and control system of the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform, and determining a target scenario test case from a plurality of the scenario test cases; Conducting an interactive usability test of the vehicle-mounted central control screen based on the target scenario test case; Acquiring driver behavior data, central control screen touch data, and environmental data through a multi-source data acquisition and synchronization system of the driver-in-the-loop simulation platform, and calculating evaluation scores of objective evaluation indicators based on the driver behavior data, the central control screen touch data, and the environmental data; Obtaining the evaluation scores of the subjective evaluation indicators given by the driver; The driver behavior data includes sight focus, gaze time, and scanning path; the central control screen touch data includes touch position, touch operation path, touch response time, and touch operation times; the environmental data includes light intensity; The objective evaluation indicators include at least one of the following: anti-accidental touch, operation path complexity, visibility of text / icon recognition in a strong light environment, distraction index under multi-tasking, and cognitive adaptability; The subjective evaluation index includes at least one of the following: frustration intensity, physical demand, mental demand, gesture coherence, voice response delay, sudden lighting adaptation, and low-light comfort; The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the anti-accidental touch performance is: Wherein, OI1 represents the anti-false touch property, t e represents the number of unexpected touch operations, and t represents the number of touch operations; The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the operation path complexity is: Among them, OI2 represents the complexity of the operation path, p t represents the theoretical shortest touch operation path length, and p represents the actual touch operation path length; The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the visibility of text / icon recognition in the strong light environment is: Among them, OI3 represents the visibility of text / icon recognition under the strong light environment, t f represents the driver's gaze time on the text / icon, a0 represents the driver's gaze time threshold for the text / icon, a1 represents the driver's maximum allowed gaze time for the text / icon, and a2 is the middle value between a0 and a1; The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the distraction index under the multi-task is: Wherein, OI4 represents the distraction index under multi-tasking, t g It is the total time the driver's eyes are off the road, and a4 is the maximum time the driver's eyes are allowed to be off the road; The calculation formula for the evaluation score of the cognitive adaptability is: Among them, OI5 represents the cognitive adaptability, r f It represents the number of icons correctly identified by the driver in the first test, and r represents the total number of icons that need to be identified in the test.

4. The method according to claim 1, wherein Based on the evaluation scores of the evaluation indicators, the weights of the evaluation indicators are determined by the entropy weight method, including: Constructing an evaluation data matrix according to the evaluation scores of the subjective evaluation indicators and the evaluation scores of the objective evaluation indicators; Performing linear scaling on the evaluation scores of the respective evaluation indicators in the evaluation data matrix, and performing positive processing on the evaluation scores after the linear scaling; The proportions of the evaluation scores after the positive processing are calculated, the information entropy of the evaluation scores is calculated according to the proportions, and the weights of the evaluation scores are calculated according to the information entropy.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that The number of drivers participating in the test is m, and the number of evaluation indicators involved in the test is n; Performing a positive processing on each of the evaluation scores after linear scaling, including: If the evaluation index score is larger, it means that the interactive usability of the vehicle-mounted central control screen is better, and the evaluation score is processed in the following manner: If the evaluation index score is smaller, it means that the interactive usability of the vehicle-mounted central control screen is better, and the evaluation score is processed as follows: Among them, x' ij represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation index of the i-th driver after the positive processing, x ij represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation index of the i-th driver, max(x j ) represents the maximum value of all evaluation scores of the jth evaluation index, min(x j ) represents the minimum value of all evaluation scores of the j-th evaluation index; The calculation formula of the proportion of the evaluation score is: Among them, p ij Indicates the proportion of the jth evaluation index under the i-th driver, satisfying The calculation formula of the information entropy of the evaluation score is: Among them, E j represents the information entropy of the jth evaluation index; The calculation formula of the evaluation score weight is: Among them, w j Represents the weight of the jth evaluation index, satisfying E k represents the information entropy of the kth evaluation index; The interactive usability evaluation model is: Wherein, U represents the interactive usability score, I j Represents the evaluation score of the jth evaluation indicator.

6. A computer device, characterized in that: It includes a processor and a memory, the memory stores a program or instruction running on the processor, and when the program or instruction is executed by the processor, it implements the steps of the method for evaluating the interactive usability of the on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle as described in any one of claims 1 to 5.

7. A readable storage medium having a program or instruction stored thereon, characterized in that: When the program or instruction is executed by the processor, the steps of the method for evaluating the interactive usability of the on-board central control screen of an operating vehicle as described in any one of claims 1 to 5 are implemented.

Images