Method for assessing an action-reaction scenario between a human and a vehicle output unit, as well as an assessment and documentation system.

Abstract

The invention relates to methods for evaluating an action-reaction scenario between a person and a vehicle output unit. The method comprises the following steps: generating at least one piece of information with the vehicle output unit as an action, wherein the information characterizes information about a functional state of at least one vehicle unit; capturing an output situation of the information with at least one capture unit; capturing the behavior of the person with at least one capture unit, at least in phases, during the output of the information as a reaction; and evaluating the perception of the information by the person, depending on the information captured about the information and the information captured about the person, with an evaluation unit.

Description

[0001] One aspect of the invention relates to a method for assessing an action-reaction scenario between a person and a vehicle output unit. Another aspect of the invention relates to a method for analyzing the development of a vehicle operating condition that is at least functionally impaired and / or improperly induced. A further aspect of the invention relates to an electronic detection system, in particular an assessment and documentation system.

[0002] In general, a method and a device for controlling a driver's attention are known from DE 10 2019 201 407 A1. Monitoring the attention and cognitive load of occupants for autonomous and semi-autonomous driving applications is known from DE 10 2021 126 254 A1.

[0003] Modern vehicles incorporate a wide variety of functional units that communicate with each other individually. The complexity of vehicle architecture is therefore very high in modern vehicles and will increase further with the growing connectivity and communication capabilities of vehicles.

[0004] This is not the only way in which various situations can arise in which at least one functional unit of the vehicle may be impaired in its functionality, or could be in the future due to current circumstances. It has also long been known that impaired functional states of a vehicle unit are communicated to a vehicle occupant, especially the driver, for example, by a warning light in the vehicle and / or by an acoustic signal.

[0005] In this context, such signals can characterize very acute functional impairments or even a complete failure. On the other hand, they can also signal conditions that are not currently leading to a failure of a functional unit, but could potentially do so in the future if no countermeasures are taken.

[0006] Increasingly, the question arises as to who bears responsibility when a malfunction or failure results in damage to the vehicle and / or other road users or objects in the vicinity. This is particularly difficult to prove if a person ignores the system's warnings indicating at least a malfunction, especially if it is later claimed that no such warning was ever issued. This can lead to numerous misunderstandings and unjustified accusations.

[0007] The object of the present invention is to create a method and a system in which an interaction scenario between a human being and a vehicle output unit is better documented.

[0008] This task is solved through procedures and a verification system, in particular an assessment and documentation system.

[0009] One aspect of the invention relates to a method for evaluating an action-reaction scenario between a person and a vehicle output unit. The method comprises, in particular, the following steps: • In particular, generating at least one piece of information with the vehicle output unit, especially on or in the vehicle, as an action, wherein the information characterizes information about a functional state of at least one vehicle unit of the vehicle; • In particular, recording an output situation of the notification information with at least one recording unit, especially whether it was output and if so, where and / or how and / or for how long and / or what was output; • In particular, recording human behavior, especially at or in the vehicle, with at least one recording unit at least in phases during the output of the warning information as a reaction; • In particular, assessing a person's perception of the information provided depends on the information collected about the information and the information collected about the person using an evaluation unit).

[0010] Such a procedure makes it easier to assess whether any warning information has been issued at all, and if so, whether, focusing on this time window of the issue and / or at least a time window after the issue has ended, the perception of this warning information can be determined or at least assumed.

[0011] This method therefore allows for a more detailed and significantly improved analysis of whether an action-reaction scenario exists between a warning message issued by the vehicle's output unit and its perception by the driver. Consequently, the documentation and verification of such an action-reaction scenario are also improved. In particular, a very clear temporal link between the potential output and the driver's reaction is documented.

[0012] Such a procedure and such an improved assessment of the perception of such a notification can therefore be helpful as clear evidence in a wide variety of situations. In particular, it is useful for clarifying questions as to whether such notification information was issued at all, and when and in what context it was issued.Similarly, it can then be better demonstrated whether a given piece of information was perceived by the person, in particular whether it was understood, and whether it was followed by a corresponding action that is positively correlated with the information, or whether the given piece of information was perceived but ignored by the person, or perceived but accompanied by an incorrect action, or whether the given piece of information was not perceived by the person unconsciously or not by ignoring it, or whether it could not be perceived at all.

[0013] Such a multifaceted analysis can then be advantageous for questions of liability in the event of damage to a vehicle component and / or a person, for example, in the case of an accident involving the vehicle, during the vehicle's manufacture, or during a service call in a workshop, etc. Therefore, situations both before delivery of the vehicle by the manufacturer and after delivery can be analyzed.

[0014] In one embodiment, the assessment involves analyzing the recorded human behavior to determine whether the human has performed an action that has changed, in particular positively changed, an operating state of at least the functional unit of the vehicle in correlation with the warning information, and if this has occurred, the perception of the warning information is affirmed or considered to have been recognized.

[0015] In another embodiment, the assessment involves analyzing the recorded human behavior to determine whether the human has made a movement that correlates with the information, in particular positively correlates with the information, and if this has occurred, whether the perception of the information is affirmed or considered to have been recognized.

[0016] It is therefore advantageous that the recorded behavior is specifically assessed to determine whether it is positively correlated with the issued warning information. A positive correlation exists, for example, if the warning information signals at least a functionally impaired state of a functional unit, this functional unit is deactivated, and / or the vehicle is parked or moved in such a way that the functional impairment is reduced, in particular completely eliminated, or at least does not worsen. In this context, corresponding behavior can also include behavior in which the person not only performs a specific action, such as a particular movement, but also how they subsequently move or use the vehicle.However, a behavior could also include, for example, a person communicating with an external unit, such as a service center and / or a traffic management system. It is particularly advantageous in this context if a specific human movement is recognized as a behavior that correlates positively with at least the perception of the information. This could include, for example, the direction of the person's gaze and / or a change in that gaze. It is also possible that the behavior includes the detection of the person's head position and / or a change in that head position, which is then used as a basis for assessing perception.

[0017] Particularly when the warning information is displayed at a discreet location within the vehicle, especially visually, the assessment of perception examines whether the gaze and / or head position is directed towards the location where the warning information is displayed. This allows us to conclude, in particular, that the person has at least perceived the warning information, especially if it is displayed visually. If a subsequent positive action then occurs, it can also be assessed whether the person has understood the warning information and reacted correctly, particularly in terms of timing, scope, and / or nature of the action. It is also possible that the person perceived the warning information but did not react or reacted incorrectly. This, too, can be assessed, particularly depending on the subsequent actions.

[0018] A particularly advantageous aspect of this method is that it not only bases the assessment of the perception of a given warning on a correlation between behavior and the warning information actually issued, but also examines when this information occurred. The specific times and durations, and the resulting timestamps, which clearly link this information—the issuing of the warning information on the one hand, and the recording of human behavior on the other—allow for a more accurate assessment of the relationship, especially with regard to the action-reaction scenario.

[0019] In particular, this method allows for a precise analysis of whether the displayed warning information was perceptible to the user in a timely manner. Furthermore, it can assess whether the displayed warning information was sufficient for the user to understand the associated signal. Finally, it can determine whether, in a simple case, the warning was perceived or not. With a more detailed assessment, it can also be advantageously determined whether the warning was perceived and what action the user took, i.e., whether they took a positive or negative action, as explained above.In this context, a positive action is one that contributes to at least preventing the situation signaled by the warning information from worsening, and in particular, to improving it. This applies especially to, for example, preventing a collision of the vehicle with another object or avoiding the acceptance of an actual impairment of function, in particular damage to at least one functional unit of the vehicle, and / or, in the case of an existing impairment of at least one functional unit, preventing it from being further impaired in its functionality.

[0020] In one embodiment, the detection of human behavior can be characterized by at least one indicator, particularly one linked to a specific time. Such indicator could, for example, be an indicator bit in a digital documentation signal. However, other types of indicator are also possible. Indicator information specifically relates to the human-initiated starting of at least one functional unit of the vehicle and / or the human-initiated shutdown of at least one functional unit of the vehicle. In particular, indicator information relates to any human action, which may also occur as a reaction to the action, namely the output of the warning information.

[0021] In one embodiment, a degree of perception can be determined when assessing perception. This makes it possible to characterize the assessment result using such information, which could, for example, be a numerical value. In this embodiment, it is also possible to evaluate the perception in a highly analytical way. In particular, different degrees can be represented in a table, list, or on a scale, so that when assessing the degree of perception, it can be determined how strong or weak the perception is. This allows for a more detailed analysis to determine, even in the case of a supposed perception, whether it was fully perceived, especially understood, and whether this results in appropriate human action, or whether this is only partially the case or not at all.

[0022] In one embodiment, the level of perception is compared to a reference level of perception. Depending on the comparison, the information is recognized as perceived or not perceived, or assessed accordingly. In another embodiment, the level of perception is classified into one of at least two, in particular predefined, perception classes. One perception class is characterized as one in which the displayed information is considered perceived or assumed to be perceived. The second perception class can be specified such that it characterizes the displayed information as not perceived.

[0023] It is also possible that at least a third perception class exists, particularly one that is predefined, characterized by the classification of the issued information as partially perceived. This makes it possible, for example, to assess perception based on the number of classes or grades, such as not perceived, low, medium, high, very high, or completely perceived.

[0024] In one embodiment, the procedure is repeated at least once according to the aspect mentioned above. This allows the assessment result to be refined. In particular, it also makes it possible, with a corresponding time delay after this at least one repetition, to recognize when a person has actually perceived the displayed information, but this can only be confirmed by a later, delayed action.

[0025] It is particularly advantageous in this context to be able to analyze different situations in more detail. For example, a warning message might signal an acute condition. This could be the case if a vehicle's functional unit is temporarily and / or significantly impaired, requiring immediate human intervention to prevent further damage to the unit and / or to avoid the risk of total vehicle damage, especially in acute cases. This is also possible if a potential accident situation involving the vehicle is detected or is imminent.Especially in such situations, it is sufficient if the procedure is carried out only once in the steps mentioned above, or, for example, if it is carried out or started twice within short successive periods of time.

[0026] In other situations, where such an acute situation does not exist, but rather a prospective situation exists in which a functional impairment of at least one functional unit might occur not immediately, but possibly in the future, this repetition is advantageous. For example, if an oil warning light or similar indicator illuminates, thus providing corresponding information, immediate action is not usually required, such as immediately topping up the oil or immediately visiting a service center. Rather, in such situations, it is quite common for such an oil warning light to illuminate very early, allowing the vehicle to still be driven without causing immediate damage, for example, to the vehicle's drive unit, which is an example of a functional unit.The same applies, for example, to the warning light indicating that the fuel level in a tank is at reserve. This allows the vehicle to be switched off in such situations and still restarted and driven again. This also allows the aforementioned procedures to be repeated at longer intervals, such as several hours or even the next day, in order to check, when the warning message was received, whether a corresponding action, such as topping up the oil and / or visiting a service center, has taken place.

[0027] The procedure is also possible before the vehicle is delivered, i.e., during the initial manufacturing process. Conditions can arise on the vehicle at this stage that require attention from a technician or inspection engineer. Warning information can also be issued in these situations. It is advantageous to be able to analyze, even retrospectively, the action-reaction scenario. This is particularly relevant if the vehicle was subsequently delivered with defects and / or if a person was injured during assembly or testing. Therefore, the issue of personal safety can also be analyzed more effectively in this context.

[0028] In one embodiment, the timing and / or number of repetitions is determined depending on the type of warning information, in particular depending on the type of a condition signaled by the warning information and at least functionally impaired in at least one vehicle unit, and / or depending on the type of a condition signaled by the warning information and at least potentially future functionally impaired in at least one functional unit of the vehicle, and / or depending on the type of active state of a functional unit signaled by the warning information, in particular during the manufacturing process and / or final inspection of the vehicle and / or during servicing of the delivered vehicle in a workshop. Thus, the warning information provides specific signals that correspond to situations which can adversely affect the vehicle itself in terms of its operational safety and / or its value.

[0029] In one embodiment, the output of the warning information, the acquisition of the aforementioned information, and the assessment of perception are performed before a defect occurs in at least one functional unit of the vehicle. It is also possible that, additionally or instead of outputting the warning information, the acquisition of the aforementioned information, and the assessment of perception are performed after a defect occurs in at least one functional unit of the vehicle. In particular, it is possible that the potential defect of a functional unit is caused by a vehicle accident. Thus, it is possible, for example, for a warning message to be issued before a vehicle accident occurs. This allows, in particular, the human reaction to the issued warning message before an accident to be precisely analyzed and documented.However, it is also possible that a warning message can be issued even after the vehicle has been involved in an accident. This then makes it possible to assess whether a person, if still capable after an accident, perceived this warning message and, in particular, whether they then took an action that correlated with it. It is also possible that the warning message is or was perceptible to someone outside the vehicle, such as pedestrians passing by the accident scene, and whether or not they perceived it can be determined. In this context, if necessary, documentation of evidence regarding a possible failure to render assistance can be reviewed in the event of an accident.

[0030] In particular, the described procedure can be carried out on a vehicle that has been fully inspected and delivered by the manufacturer. This allows for improved clarification of questions of responsibility, liability, and / or warranty claims for vehicles that have already been delivered. However, it is also possible, as already explained, to carry out the procedure during the actual manufacturing or production of the vehicle. This allows the vehicle manufacturer itself to verify whether, for example, a technician installing functional units in the vehicle noticed a warning message and acted correctly. This might be the case, for instance, with safety-critical functional units. For example, in the case of electric vehicles, this could involve the installation of the battery, etc., and / or, more generally, the installation of the vehicle's electrical system or similar components.In this context, functional tests of the installed unit before vehicle delivery can be better documented. This also improves and documents personal safety. Furthermore, it allows for better analysis of questions regarding the correct assembly and functional testing of a vehicle not yet delivered by the manufacturer, and enables the documentation of any impairments suffered by a technician, such as ignoring a warning notice. This, in particular, allows for better documentation of both the technician's own impairments and any impairments to the vehicle's functional unit that may have occurred before delivery.

[0031] In one embodiment, the potential output of the warning information, the warning information itself, the captured information, and / or the result of the perception assessment are stored. In particular, they are also documented for further processing. It is possible that the storage unit in which this data is stored is a non-erasable storage device. The storage unit can, for example, be a permanent data storage device. This storage unit can, in particular, be a storage unit accessible to humans. It can be designed to be tamper-proof.

[0032] It is also possible that this information is stored redundantly. This means, for example, that it is stored in at least one storage unit and in at least one separate storage unit. One of these storage units could then be located in the vehicle itself. Another storage unit could be located externally, for example, at the vehicle manufacturer's premises.

[0033] In one embodiment, the storage unit can also record whether a person was driving the vehicle when the warning message was issued. This allows for verification of whether, particularly during the time period in which the warning message was issued and / or in a subsequent time window, the vehicle was driven manually or at least semi-manually by a person, or whether it was driven autonomously by an assistance system. This is another highly advantageous embodiment that can also be used as information in the method for assessing the action-reaction scenario.

[0034] It is also possible that the storage unit is designed as a reversible ring buffer. In such a case, the execution of the procedure and the information generated can be created and stored, and then automatically deleted after a certain period. This allows for an alternating cycle of generating this information, deleting it, generating it again, deleting it again, and so on. This enables the observation and evaluation of longer periods. However, this does not generate very large amounts of data that would then be permanently stored and require processing.

[0035] It is possible to trigger the output of the warning information based on a specific trigger criterion. In particular, a trigger criterion could be a safety-critical driving situation of the vehicle and / or safety-critical handling by a person in or on the vehicle and / or a malfunctioning state of at least one function of the vehicle and / or an expected malfunctioning state of at least one functional unit of the vehicle. Such situation-dependent triggering of the generation and potential output of warning information also allows for efficient execution of the corresponding procedure, thereby conserving computing resources and reducing the number of messages generated.

[0036] In one embodiment, the acquisition of the aforementioned information—that is, the acquisition of whether and, if so, which warning information is displayed, and the recording of human behavior—can be dependent on a trigger criterion. In particular, the trigger criteria mentioned above for triggering the display of warning information can also be used here.

[0037] It is also possible that the procedure allows at least two different pieces of information to be issued simultaneously, at least temporarily. These can be positioned close to each other on or inside the vehicle, or issued at corresponding locations. The procedure also makes it possible to assess when and / or which of these two pieces of information were actually issued, and / or, if issued, which one was perceived by the person. In particular, if perception occurred and the person then took action, it is possible to assess whether the actions were positively correlated with the first piece of information and / or the second piece of information.This allows for a more detailed assessment and, in particular, analysis of whether at least one action was positively correlated with one piece of information but negatively correlated with the other piece of information, or whether the action was negatively correlated with both pieces of information or positively correlated with both pieces of information.

[0038] The procedure can therefore generally document and prove whether at least one piece of information was issued, and if so, whether it was issued in terms of type and / or timing in relation to the situation signaled by it, and / or whether the recorded human behavior with regard to at least one piece of information and the potential is linked to a perception, partial perception, or non-perception, and / or whether a possible human action is in positive and negative correlation with the issuance and / or the degree of perception.

[0039] Another aspect of the invention relates to a method for analyzing the development of an at least functionally impaired operating condition of the vehicle. The method preferably comprises the following steps: • Providing a result of the assessment of the human perception of at least one piece of information, wherein the result is generated using a method according to the above-mentioned aspect or an advantageous embodiment thereof; • Providing information on the vehicle's at least functionally impaired state of use; • Determining the human contribution to the development of the vehicle's at least functionally impaired state of use, depending on the provided result of the assessment of perception and the information provided regarding the vehicle's at least functionally impaired state of use.

[0040] Such a procedure makes it possible to identify, particularly in terms of timing, in great detail the basis on which at least a functionally impaired and / or improperly brought about condition of at least one functional unit has arisen and what or who may be responsible for it.

[0041] Another aspect of the invention relates to a method for analyzing the development of an at least impaired condition of a person interacting with a vehicle, comprising the following steps: • Providing a result of the assessment of the human perception of at least one piece of information, wherein the result is generated using a method according to the above-mentioned aspect or an advantageous embodiment thereof; • Providing information on the at least impaired condition of the person; • Determining a human contribution to the development of the at least impaired state of the human being, depending on the provided result of the assessment of perception and the information provided regarding the at least impaired state of the human being.

[0042] The person can be a vehicle occupant, such as a driver, or a fitter or inspector in manufacturing, or a mechanic in a service workshop. The person can also be a rescue worker, such as a firefighter, paramedic, or police officer, etc.

[0043] Another aspect of the invention relates to an electronic verification system, in particular an assessment and documentation system. This system comprises at least one evaluation unit. The evaluation unit can be a computing unit such as a computer or a microprocessor. The system can also comprise at least one storage unit. In particular, the system can also comprise at least one acquisition unit.

[0044] A detection unit can be, for example, a camera. This camera can be sensitive in the spectral range visible to humans. In particular, several such cameras are provided for the optical detection of, in particular, one of the locations on or in the vehicle where at least some warning information can be displayed. A detection unit can be positioned on or in the vehicle in such a way that it can detect at least one vehicle occupant, in particular a driver, especially in the area of ​​the head and / or torso and / or legs. A detection unit can also be part of a vehicle's environmental sensing system.

[0045] It is also possible for a detection unit to be an acoustic detection unit. This would allow, for example, the recording of the time, duration, and / or type of acoustic warning information issued on or in the vehicle. Furthermore, it would then also be possible to record human acoustic behavior.

[0046] In one embodiment, it is also possible that, depending on the human's assessment of the warning, the information and / or other information is transmitted to a human communication device. For example, the communication device could be a mobile device such as a smartphone or tablet. This also makes it possible, particularly in non-acute but prospective situations where a malfunction of a functional unit does not immediately lead to significant damage to the vehicle, the person, or other road users, but rather may or will only do so in several hours or days, to provide further information or attempt to draw the human's attention to the information and the condition it signals.In this context, it may be possible, for example, that when a warning message is displayed on or in the vehicle, a check is performed to determine whether, and if so, which communication device is located on or near the vehicle, or is connected to the vehicle's communication system. This allows, in particular, the identification of which communication device was in the vehicle at the relevant time and thus the assumption that it belongs to or is assigned to a vehicle occupant, especially the driver.

[0047] Another independent aspect of the invention relates to a method for detecting an action-reaction scenario between a human and a vehicle output unit, in particular comprising the following steps: • Outputting a warning message using the vehicle output unit as an action, wherein the warning message characterizes (safety-relevant) information about a functional state of at least one vehicle unit of the vehicle; • Recording the output of the notification information with a recording unit and recording the time of the start of the output and / or the duration of the output; • Capturing human behavior with a capture unit at least in phases during the output of the informational message as a reaction; • Documentation, in particular storage, of the recorded information concerning the information and the person. • Providing the documented information to demonstrate the action-reaction scenarios, in particular to an auditing body.

[0048] Advantageous embodiments of the above-mentioned method are also to be regarded as advantageous embodiments of this further independent aspect.

[0049] Another aspect of the invention relates to an electronic verification system, in particular an assessment and documentation system, with an evaluation unit, wherein the system is configured to carry out a method according to the above-mentioned aspect or an advantageous embodiment thereof.

[0050] Another aspect of the invention relates to an electronic detection system for proving the activation of a warning and / or for proving that a vehicle occupant has perceived the warning. The electronic detection system includes, in particular: • a vehicle output unit which is configured to generate and issue a warning depending on a usage situation; • at least one recording system with which the time of generation of the warning and / or the time of issue of the warning and / or the duration of the issued warning and / or the type of warning generated can be recorded; • at least one evaluation unit designed to assess the vehicle occupants, in particular the driver, based on the information generated by the vehicle output unit, the information recorded by the detection system, and information concerning the vehicle occupants, which relates at least to information within the time interval of the generated and issued warning; and • a storage unit in which at least the information of the evaluation unit is stored, in particular also the information of the vehicle output unit and / or the recording system.

[0051] In particular, this electronic verification system, which is specifically an assessment and documentation system, is set up with the aforementioned units to carry out a procedure in accordance with the above-mentioned aspect or an advantageous embodiment thereof.

[0052] It is possible that, when capturing warning information, an image or video of the area on or inside the vehicle where the warning information can be displayed, or is displayed, is recorded. A person can also be captured in at least one image or video. This can be done, for example, with an interior detection unit such as a camera and / or other sensors. It is possible that the recording includes the person's behavior, particularly any subsequent action, such as, as already mentioned, the activation of a vehicle control. This could include, for example, activating the hazard warning lights and / or operating the vehicle's steering and / or braking systems.The evaluation of the vehicle's sensors, for example to document when a person touches the vehicle's steering wheel, can also be carried out in this regard.

[0053] Exemplary embodiments of the invention are explained in more detail below with reference to schematic drawings. These show: Fig. 1 a schematic representation of an embodiment of a vehicle according to the invention with an embodiment of an electronic detection system according to the invention, in particular an assessment and documentation system; and Fig. 2 a simplified flowchart regarding the representation of exemplary implementations of a process flow.

[0054] In the figures, identical or functionally equivalent elements are given the same reference symbols.

[0055] In Fig. Figure 1 is a schematic representation of vehicle 1. Vehicle 1 could be, for example, a passenger car, a truck, or a bus. However, vehicle 1 could also be, for example, a single-track vehicle, such as a motorcycle.

[0056] Vehicle 1 has a large number of functional units, of which in Fig. Figure 1 shows two functional units 2, 3, and 4 only symbolically and as representatives. Neither the position nor the type of functional units 2 to 4 should be understood as restrictive. A functional unit 2 to 4 can be any technical unit on or in the vehicle 1. It can be a mechanical unit or an electrical unit.

[0057] Vehicle 1 also has a steering element 5, which could be, for example, a steering wheel. The steering element 5 is part of a steering system 6 of vehicle 1. Furthermore, vehicle 1 also has a braking system 7. The steering system 6 and the braking system 7 can also be examples of functional units of vehicle 1. Another functional unit of vehicle 1 could be, for example, an on-board electrical system.

[0058] Vehicle 1 can have an internal combustion engine as its drive unit. However, it can also have, for example, a plug-in hybrid system as its drive system. It is also possible that Vehicle 1 is a purely electric vehicle and has only an electric drive as its drive unit.

[0059] The vehicle 1 has a detection system 9 in the vehicle, i.e., in particular in a passenger compartment 8 and / or on the vehicle 1, for example also on the outside of the vehicle 1, which is Fig. 1 is merely symbolically marked with a reference symbol. The detection system 9 can have several detection units. A detection unit can be designed for optical and / or acoustic detection of information.

[0060] The vehicle 1 also includes an electronic system 10. The electronic system 10 preferably includes at least one evaluation system with at least one evaluation unit 11. In particular, the system 10 can also include at least one storage unit 12. The system 10 can preferably be an electronic verification system. In particular, it can be an assessment and documentation system. The system 10 can be located entirely within the vehicle 1. However, it can also be arranged externally to the vehicle 1 in partial components.

[0061] System 10 can include at least one generation unit 13. Generation unit 13 is specifically designed to generate and output at least one visual and / or audible warning message, depending on the vehicle 1's usage situation. This warning message can be a warning. A usage situation can be the use of vehicle 1 in its fully manufactured state, delivered to a customer by a vehicle manufacturer. However, a usage situation is also possible when vehicle 1 is currently in the manufacturing process or in the vehicle manufacturer's own production process and is therefore not yet fully completed and delivered, or is already fully completed at the manufacturer but not yet delivered and is undergoing final testing.

[0062] As already mentioned, a recording system 9 can have at least one recording unit 14, preferably several recording units 14.

[0063] In particular, system 10 also includes an assessment unit 15. This unit is designed to perform a system-based assessment, specifically for the driver and vehicle occupants, based on information generated by generation unit 13 and the information captured by the data acquisition system 9, as to whether a person has perceived generated and actually issued assistance information, especially a warning, and in particular how they perceived such information. Specifically, this assessment unit 15 is also designed to assess a recorded human action, specifically whether it correlates with issued information and / or with the individual's specific level of perception of the warning.

[0064] Depending on the situation, the procedure can also be carried out if a person is inside vehicle 1, i.e., in passenger compartment 8. However, it is also possible to carry out the procedure if a person is outside vehicle 1. In particular, the person could be an occupant of vehicle 1, a pedestrian passing by vehicle 1, or the like. A person outside vehicle 1 could also be a technician who is involved in the production of vehicle 1 as part of their intended function.

[0065] Based on the simplified flowchart in Fig. 2. Examples of procedures will be explained in more detail.

[0066] The procedure for assessing an action-reaction scenario between a human 16 and the vehicle output unit 17 involves the following steps: • Generating, according to step S1, at least one piece of information 18 with the vehicle output unit 17 as an action, wherein the information 18 characterizes information about a functional state of at least one vehicle unit 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 of the vehicle 1; • Capture, according to step S2, an output situation of the information notice 18 with at least one capture unit 14; • To capture, according to step S3, a human behavior 16 with at least one capture unit 14 at least in phases during the output of the information 18 as a reaction; • Assess, according to step S4, a perception of the information 18 by the person 16 depending on the information recorded about the information and the information recorded about the person 16 with an evaluation unit 11.

[0067] The output of the information notice 18 and / or the information notice 18 and / or the recorded information and / or the result of the assessment of perception for documentation are stored in at least one storage unit 12 according to step S5.

[0068] According to step S6, an analysis of the development of a functionally impaired operating condition of vehicle 1 is carried out. In particular, the following steps are performed: • Providing a result of the assessment of the perception of at least one piece of information by the human 16, whereby the result is generated in particular according to steps S1 to S4; • Providing information on the at least functionally impaired operational state of vehicle 1 to the evaluation unit 11; • Determining a human 16 contribution to the development of the at least functionally impaired state of use of the vehicle 1 depending on the provided result of the assessment of perception and the provided information on the at least functionally impaired state of use of the vehicle 1.

[0069] Further advantageous embodiments are set out in the claims and in the general part of the description. Reference symbol list 1 vehicle 2 vehicle units 3 vehicle units 4 vehicle units 5 vehicle units 6 vehicle units 7 vehicle units 8 passenger compartment 9 Data collection system 10 System 11 Evaluation system 12 storage units 13 generation unit 14 recording units 16 people 17 vehicle dispensing units 18. Information S1 to S6 process steps QUOTES INCLUDED IN THE DESCRIPTION

[0000] This list of documents cited by the applicant was automatically generated and is included solely for the reader's convenience. The list is not part of the German patent or utility model application. The DPMA accepts no liability for any errors or omissions. Cited patent literature

[0000] DE 10 2019 201 407 A1

[0002] DE 10 2021 126 254 A1

[0002]

Claims

[1] Method for assessing an action-reaction scenario between a human (16) and a vehicle output unit (17), comprising the following steps: Generating at least one piece of information (18) with the vehicle output unit (17) as an action, wherein the information (18) characterizes information about a functional state of at least one vehicle unit (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) of the vehicle (1); Capturing an output situation of the guidance information (18) with at least one capture unit (14); Capturing human behavior (16) with at least one capture unit (14) at least in phases during the output of the information (18) as a response; Assessing a person's (16) perception of the information given (18) depending on the information given about the information given and the information given about the person (16) with an evaluation unit (11). [2] Method according to claim 1, wherein in the assessment the recorded behavior of the person (16) is analyzed to determine whether the person (16) has performed an action which has changed an operating state of at least the functional unit (2 to 7) of the vehicle (1) in correlation with the information (18), and if this has occurred, the perception of the information (18) is affirmed. [3] Method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein in the assessment the detected behavior of the person (16) is analyzed to determine whether the person (16) has made a movement that is in correlation with the information provided, and if this has occurred, the perception of the information provided (18) is affirmed. [4] Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the behavior of the person (16) includes the direction of the gaze of the person (16) and / or a change in the direction of the gaze of the person (16) and / or a head position of the person (16) and / or a change in the head position of the person (16). [5] Method according to claim 4, wherein the information (18) is optically displayed at at least one discrete location on or in the vehicle (1) and, in assessing perception, it is checked whether the gaze direction and / or the head position is or is directed towards the location. [6] Method according to any of the preceding claims, wherein the detection of human behavior (16) is characterized by at least one time-linked indicator information, wherein an indicator information relates to the human-initiated starting of at least one unit of the vehicle (1) and / or the human-initiated stopping of at least one unit of the vehicle (1). [7] Method according to any of the preceding claims, wherein a degree of perception is determined when assessing perception. [8] Method according to claim 7, wherein the degree of perception is compared with a reference degree of perception and, depending on the comparison, the information (18) is recognized as perceived or judged as not perceived, or the degree of perception is classified into one of at least two perception classes, wherein one perception class characterizes the information (18) as perceived and the second perception class characterizes the information (18) as not perceived, in particular at least a third perception class is specified which classifies the information (18) as partially perceived. [9] A method according to any of the preceding claims, wherein the method according to any of the preceding claims is repeated at least once. [10] Method according to claim 9, wherein a time of at least one repetition and / or the number of repetitions is determined depending on the type of information (18). [11] Method according to claim 10, wherein the time of at least one repetition and / or the number of repetitions is determined depending on the type of a condition signaled with the information (18) and at least functionally impaired of at least one vehicle unit (2 to 7) of the vehicle (1) and / or depending on the type of a condition signaled with the information (18) and at least potentially future functionally impaired of at least one functional unit (2 to 7) of the vehicle (1). [12] Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the output of the warning information (18) and the acquisition of said information as well as the assessment of the perception is carried out before the occurrence of a specific operating situation of the vehicle (1) and / or the output of the warning information (18) and the acquisition of said information as well as the assessment of the perception is carried out after the occurrence of a specific operating situation of the vehicle (1). [13] Method according to any of the preceding claims, wherein the output of the warning information (18) and / or the warning information (18) and / or the recorded information and / or the result of the assessment of the perception are stored for documentation in at least one storage unit (12). [14] Method according to one of the preceding claims, wherein the output of the warning information (18) and / or the acquisition of the information is dependent on a trigger criterion, wherein the trigger criterion is one or more of a safety-critical driving situation of the vehicle (1), a safety-critical handling of the vehicle (1) and a functionally impaired or expected functionally impaired state of at least one functional unit (2 to 7) of the vehicle (1). [15] Method for analyzing the development of a condition of use of the vehicle that is at least functionally impaired (1), comprising the following steps: Providing a result of the assessment of the perception of the at least one piece of information by the human being (16), wherein the result is generated using a method according to any one of the preceding claims 1 to 13; Providing information on the vehicle's at least impaired state of use (1); Determining a human contribution (16) to the creation of the at least functionally impaired state of use of the vehicle (1) depending on the provided result of the assessment of perception and the provided information on the at least functionally impaired state of use of the vehicle (1). [16] Electronic verification system (10) with an evaluation unit (11), wherein the system (10) is configured to carry out a method according to one of the preceding claims.

Images