Safe driving guidance device

Abstract

To provide a safe driving guide device for easily guiding safe driving.SOLUTION: The safe driving guidance device includes a zone determination unit, a storage unit, an implementability determination unit, and an action determination unit that determines whether or not a driver has implemented a safe action in a target zone. The safe driving guidance device includes a proposal action determination part for determining a proposal action which is a safe action to be proposed to the driver among the safe actions determined not to be performed by the action determination part. The safe driving guidance device includes a notification control unit that controls a notification device to propose the suggested action determined by the suggested action determination unit to the driver and not to propose a safe action other than the suggested action to the driver even if the safe action is not performed by the driver. When there are a plurality of safe actions that have not been performed by the driver, the suggestion action determination unit determines a safe action with the highest ease of performance as the suggestion action.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 5

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The disclosure in this specification relates to a safe driving guidance device. [Background technology]

[0002] Patent Document 1 discloses a driving assistance device that maintains and improves the driving ability of a driver. The contents of the prior art document are incorporated by reference as explanations of the technical elements in this specification. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0003] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2023-131358 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0004] In the configuration of the prior art document, if the safe driving evaluation determines that the driver has performed the expected driving, positive information is provided to the driver, and if the evaluation determines that the driver has not performed the expected driving, driving clue information is provided. Here, in order to guide the driver to safe driving, it is necessary to accurately suggest driving maneuvers that will lead to safe driving to the driver. However, depending on the content of the suggestions, the driver may feel repulsed. As a result, there is a possibility that the suggested content will not be implemented, or even if implemented, will not be continued, and behavioral changes leading to safe driving will not be achieved. Further improvements are required for safe driving guidance devices in the above-mentioned respects and other respects not mentioned.

[0005] One disclosed object is to provide a safe driving guidance device that can easily guide a driver to drive safely. [Means for solving the problem]

[0006] The safe driving guidance device disclosed herein includes an area determination unit (11) that determines whether the vehicle is located within a target area; a storage unit (12) that stores a plurality of safety actions set for each target area; an implementability determining unit (14) that determines the implementability of a plurality of safety actions; a behavior determination unit (15) that determines whether the driver has performed a safe behavior within the target area; a proposed action determination unit (16) that determines a proposed action, which is a safety action to be proposed to the driver to perform, from among the safety actions that the action determination unit has determined not to have performed; a notification control unit (19) that controls the notification device (50) to suggest the proposed action determined by the proposed action determination unit to the driver, and not to suggest safety actions other than the proposed action to the driver even if the safety actions are safety actions that the driver has not performed; When there are multiple safe actions that the driver has not taken, the suggested action determination unit determines the safe action that is easiest to take as the suggested action.

[0007] The disclosed safe driving guidance device includes a suggested action determination unit that determines the safe action that is easiest to implement as the suggested action when there are multiple safe actions that the driver has not implemented. This makes it easier for the driver to accept and implement the suggested safe action compared to when a safe action that is difficult to implement is proposed. Therefore, a safe driving guidance device that easily guides the driver to safe driving can be provided.

[0008] The various aspects disclosed in this specification employ different technical means to achieve their respective objectives. The reference numerals in parentheses in the claims and in this section are intended to exemplify correspondences with the following embodiments and are not intended to limit the technical scope. The objectives, features, and advantages disclosed in this specification will become more apparent by reference to the following detailed description and the accompanying drawings. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0009] [Figure 1]FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a safe driving guidance system. [Figure 2] 10 is a flowchart relating to safe driving guidance control. [Figure 3] 3 is a flowchart relating to the process of step S120 in FIG. 2. [Figure 4] FIG. 10 is a block diagram showing a safe driving guidance system according to a second embodiment. [Figure 5] 10 is a flowchart relating to safe driving guidance in the second embodiment. [Figure 6] 6 is a flowchart relating to the process of step S220 in FIG. 5. [Figure 7] 6 is a flowchart relating to the process of step S240 in FIG. 5. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0010] Several embodiments will be described with reference to the drawings. In several embodiments, functionally and / or structurally corresponding and / or associated parts may be designated by the same reference numeral or by different reference numerals in the hundreds or more places. For corresponding and / or associated parts, reference may be made to the descriptions of other embodiments.

[0011] (First embodiment) 1, the safe driving guidance system 1 includes a safe driving guidance device 10, a sensor 30, and a notification device 50. The safe driving guidance system 1 is a system for guiding a driver of a moving object such as a vehicle to drive safely. The safe driving guidance system 1 can also be said to be a system for suggesting safe behaviors that the driver has not been able to perform to the driver, thereby changing the driver's behavior to achieve safer driving.

[0012] The sensor 30 is a device for acquiring information about the host vehicle and information about the driver who drives the host vehicle. The sensor 30 includes a locator equipped with a GNSS (Global Navigation Satellite System) receiver and a map database as a positioning device for determining the position of the host vehicle. The sensor 30 includes a front camera, a side camera, and a rear camera as imaging devices for capturing images of the surroundings of the host vehicle. The sensor 30 includes a driver status monitor that functions as a biosensor for capturing images of the driver of the host vehicle and determining the driver's condition. The sensor 30 includes an acceleration sensor that measures the acceleration of the host vehicle. The sensor 30 includes a detection device that detects the amount of depression of the accelerator pedal and the amount of depression of the brake pedal.

[0013] The sensor 30 is connected to the safe driving guidance device 10. The safe driving guidance device 10 can acquire various detection results detected by the sensor 30 through communication via an in-vehicle network.

[0014] The notification device 50 is a device for notifying the driver of information. The notification device 50 includes a head-up display or an infotainment display as a device for notifying the driver of visual information. The notification device 50 includes a speaker for notifying the driver of auditory information. The notification device 50 includes a vibration device that is mounted on the steering wheel or the seat and notifies the driver of tactile information.

[0015] The notification device 50 is connected to the safe driving guidance device 10. The safe driving guidance device 10 controls the notification device 50 to make notifications, thereby making it possible to notify the driver of various information.

[0016] The safe driving guidance device 10 includes an area determination unit 11, a memory unit 12, a feasibility determination unit 14, an action determination unit 15, a suggested action determination unit 16, and a notification control unit 19. The safe driving guidance device 10 is a device equipped with a processor that executes various control programs for guiding the driver to drive safely.

[0017] The zone determination unit 11 determines whether the vehicle is located within a predetermined target zone. A target zone is a zone where safety behaviors that the driver should take are predetermined. A target zone is a zone where traffic accidents are likely to occur and driving should be more careful than in non-target zones. Examples of target zones include areas with poor visibility, zones designated as Zone 30, and zones that include locations where traffic accidents frequently occur.

[0018] One method for setting areas with poor visibility is to prepare map information in advance that indicates the degree of poor visibility based on static information such as surrounding buildings, and set the area as an area with poor visibility based on that information. In this case, for example, if the area is surrounded by tall buildings, it is set as an area with poor visibility.

[0019] Furthermore, an imaging device or radar device mounted on a vehicle may be used to determine the degree of poor visibility based on dynamic information such as the presence and location of parked vehicles, and the area may be designated as an area with poor visibility. In this case, for example, an area may be designated as an area with poor visibility when there are multiple parked vehicles lined up around the vehicle. The dynamic information for determining the degree of poor visibility is not limited to the presence or absence of parked vehicles, and information such as whether the oncoming lane is congested may also be used. In this case, if the oncoming lane is congested, there is a possibility that a pedestrian may suddenly appear between vehicles parked in the oncoming lane, and therefore the area may be designated as a target area with poor visibility.

[0020] The memory unit 12 stores safety actions that the driver should take in the target area. Examples of safety actions include checking the surroundings, taking the accelerator off, preparing to brake, and applying the brake. Checking the surroundings means checking the safety of the surroundings in the direction of travel of the vehicle. Taking the accelerator off means easing up on the accelerator pedal of the vehicle to suppress acceleration. Applying the brake means applying the brakes of the vehicle to decelerate. Preparing to brake means moving the foot to the position of the brake pedal in preparation for applying the brake.

[0021] Safety actions are not limited to the above examples and may be subdivided into more specific safety actions. For example, brake preparation may be stored separately as releasing the foot from the accelerator pedal, moving the foot toward the brake pedal, and placing the foot on the brake pedal. Surroundings check may be stored separately as checking the surroundings by moving the neck and leaning forward to check the surroundings more widely. The accelerator opening threshold for determining accelerator release may be set to multiple levels, such as 15%, 10%, and 5%, and stored separately according to the degree of acceleration suppression. Alternatively, the accelerator may be released but not below 10%, and the accelerator may be released until the accelerator opening reaches 10% or below. The brake pedal depression amount for determining brake application may be stored separately as being lightly depressed and being heavily depressed.

[0022] Safety behavior before subdivision is a major category behavior that shows the outline of the safety behavior, and safety behavior after subdivision is a minor category behavior that shows the details of the safety behavior. Minor category behaviors are behaviors that are divided into smaller categories than major category behaviors. For example, preparing to brake is a major category behavior. On the other hand, the three safety behaviors of releasing the foot from the accelerator pedal, moving the foot toward the brake pedal, and placing the foot on the brake pedal are minor category behaviors that correspond to preparing to brake. For example, taking the accelerator off is a major category behavior. On the other hand, the three safety behaviors of reducing the accelerator opening to 15% or less, reducing it to 10% or less, and reducing it to 5% or less are minor category behaviors that correspond to taking the accelerator off. The subdivision of safety behavior is not limited to the above examples, and the safety behaviors exemplified as minor category behaviors may be further subdivided.

[0023] Furthermore, the safety behavior is not limited to the above-mentioned examples, and various behaviors that contribute to safe driving can be set. For example, avoidance steering, which involves steering away from a risky location, may be included in the safety behavior. Here, a risky location is a location where a risk of an accident is assumed to be lurking, such as a parallel-parked vehicle.

[0024] The implementation ease determination unit 14 determines the ease of implementation of each of the plurality of safety actions for the driver. When the safety actions are stored as being divided into major action categories and minor action categories, the implementation ease is determined for each of the major action categories and minor action categories. The method for determining the ease of implementation can be an experiment using a driving simulator. In the experiment, the number of times each safety action has been performed in a target area is tallied, and the more frequently each safety action has been performed, the easier it is to implement. The method for determining the ease of implementation can also be a safety action that is determined as being easy to implement by a large number of responses that it is easy to perform in a driver questionnaire. Alternatively, a safety action that is performed as many times as possible based on driving conditions in an actual vehicle, rather than a driving simulator, can be determined as being easy to implement. For example, assume that four actions, namely, checking the surroundings, taking the accelerator off, preparing to brake, and applying the brake, are set as safety actions. As an example, it can be set that taking the accelerator off is the easiest to implement, followed by preparing to brake, then applying the brake, and checking the surroundings is the most difficult to implement.

[0025] It is not necessary to uniformly determine the same ease of implementation for all drivers. For example, the experimental results for elderly drivers and those for non-elderly drivers may be compiled separately, and the ease of implementation for elderly drivers and those for non-elderly drivers may be determined separately. Alternatively, the experimental results for novice drivers and experienced drivers may be compiled separately, and the ease of implementation for novice drivers and experienced drivers may be determined separately.

[0026] The method for determining the ease of implementation of a safety behavior is not limited to the above example. Examples of factors for determining the ease of implementation of a safety behavior are described below. One factor for determining the ease of implementation is the number of actions included in the safety behavior. The fewer actions included in the safety behavior, the easier it is determined to be to implement. Specifically, when comparing the safety behavior of taking your foot off the accelerator with the safety behavior of slowing down by braking, taking your foot off the accelerator is determined to be easier to implement because it does not require the action of changing your foot position.

[0027] Information about the driver's injuries or chronic illnesses can be used as one of the factors for determining ease of implementation. For example, in the case of a driver with a neck injury, moving the neck itself is difficult, so it is determined that checking the surroundings, which is a safety behavior that requires moving the neck, is difficult to implement. Alternatively, in the case of a driver with a leg injury, moving the foot itself is difficult, so it is determined that safety behaviors that require moving the foot, such as taking the accelerator off, preparing the brakes, and applying the brakes, are difficult to implement. Alternatively, in the case of a driver with an arm injury, moving the arm itself is difficult, so it is determined that evasive steering, which is a safety behavior that requires moving the arm, is difficult to implement. For example, in the case of a driver with a chronic hand numbness, moving the hand itself is difficult, so it is determined that evasive steering, which is a safety behavior that requires steering, is difficult to implement.

[0028] The behavior determination unit 15 acquires the driver's behavior using the detection results of the sensors 30 mounted on the vehicle. The behavior determination unit 15 acquires behavior related to checking the surroundings from the driver's line of sight and neck movement using a driver status monitor. The behavior determination unit 15 acquires behavior related to brake preparation from an imaging device that detects the driver's foot movement. The behavior determination unit 15 acquires behavior related to accelerator release and brake application from a detection device that detects the amount of depression of the accelerator pedal and brake pedal.

[0029] The behavior determination unit 15 acquires the behavior of the driver in the target area and determines whether the behavior set as a safe behavior in the target area is being performed. Whether the driver is checking the surroundings can be determined from the degree to which the driver's gaze is concentrated near the center or the degree to which the gaze is dispersed to the left and right. Whether the driver has released the accelerator can be determined from whether the accelerator opening is below a threshold. Whether the driver is preparing to brake can be determined from the position of the right foot. Whether the driver is applying the brake can be determined from whether the amount of brake depression is above a threshold. The accelerator opening and brake depression amount may be acquired from a detection device for the accelerator opening and brake depression amount installed in the vehicle, or may be estimated from the position and tilt of the driver's foot or pedal.

[0030] The proposed action determination unit 16 determines the safety actions to be proposed to the driver as the proposed actions. The proposed actions are selected from among the safety actions that the driver should take in the target area but that the driver did not take. If there are multiple safety actions that the driver did not take in the target area, some of the multiple safety actions are determined as the proposed actions, and the remaining safety actions are determined as safety actions that are not the proposed actions.

[0031] The notification control unit 19 controls the notification device 50 to notify the driver. Notifications made to the driver include notifications proposing suggested actions. The suggested actions by the notification device 50 can be suggested as visual information. For example, text, icons, or videos are displayed on a head-up display to encourage the driver to carry out the suggested action. The suggested actions by the notification device 50 can be suggested as auditory information. For example, a sound is output from a speaker to encourage the driver to carry out the suggested action. The suggested actions by the notification device 50 can be suggested by combining visual information, audio information, and tactile information. For example, the suggested action can be displayed as text, and a sound indicating that the suggested action has been displayed can be output and a vibration device attached to the steering wheel can be vibrated.

[0032] The following describes in detail the safe driving guidance control using the safe driving guidance device 10. The safe driving guidance control is a control for enabling the driver to gradually achieve safe driving and maintaining safe driving by the driver over a long period of time.

[0033] 2, when the power switch of the vehicle is turned on and the vehicle starts to travel, the current position of the vehicle is acquired in step S101. The current position of the vehicle is acquired using a locator included in sensor 30. After the current position of the vehicle is acquired, the process proceeds to step S102.

[0034] In step S102, the area determination unit 11 determines whether the vehicle has entered the target area. If the current location is within the target area, it is determined that the vehicle has entered the target area, and the process proceeds to step S111. On the other hand, if the current location is not within the target area, it is determined that the vehicle has not entered the target area, and the process returns to step S101. As a result, no suggestions are made to the driver until the vehicle enters the target area.

[0035] In step S111, the behavior determination unit 15 acquires the safety behaviors performed by the driver within the target area. For example, assume that the target area has four safety behaviors set: accelerator release, brake preparation, brake on, and surroundings check, and only two safety behaviors, checking surroundings and accelerator release, have been performed within the target area. In this case, it is determined that checking surroundings and accelerator release are safety behaviors performed by the driver, and brake preparation and brake on are safety behaviors not performed by the driver. After acquiring the safety behaviors performed by the driver, the process proceeds to step S112.

[0036] In step S112, the current position of the vehicle is acquired, similar to step S101, and then the process proceeds to step S113.

[0037] In step S113, the area determination unit 11 determines whether the vehicle has exited the target area. If the current location is not within the target area, it is determined that the vehicle has exited the target area, and the process proceeds to step S120. On the other hand, if the current location is within the target area, it is determined that the vehicle has not exited the target area, and the process returns to step S111. This allows the safety behaviors performed by the driver to continue to be acquired from the time the vehicle entered the target area until the time the vehicle exited the target area.

[0038] In step S120, a suggested action to be suggested to the driver after the driver leaves the target area is determined. Details of the method for determining the suggested action will be described below.

[0039] 3, when the determination of the suggested behavior starts, the behavior determination unit 15 determines whether or not there is any unexecuted safety behavior in the target area in step S121. If there is any unexecuted safety behavior, the process proceeds to step S125. On the other hand, if there is no unexecuted safety behavior, the process proceeds to step S127.

[0040] In step S125, the implementation ease determination unit 14 determines the implementation ease of each unimplemented safety behavior. If there are multiple unimplemented safety behaviors, the implementation ease is determined for all of the unimplemented safety behaviors. After determining the implementation ease of each safety behavior, the process proceeds to step S126.

[0041] In step S126, the proposed action determination unit 16 determines a proposed action to be proposed to the driver. The proposed action determination unit 16 selects one of the safety actions that is most easy to implement as determined by the implementability determination unit 14, and determines it as the proposed action. After determining the proposed action, the process proceeds to step S131.

[0042] In step S127, since all safety actions have been taken in the target area, the suggested action determiner 16 determines that there is no suggested action. After determining that there is no suggested action, the process proceeds to step S131.

[0043] In step S131 of FIG. 2, it is determined whether or not there is a suggested action. If there is a suggested action, the process proceeds to step S133. On the other hand, if there is no suggested action, the safe driving guidance control is terminated. However, it is preferable to start the safe driving guidance control again after the safe driving guidance control is terminated. This means that the safe driving guidance control is repeatedly executed while the driver is driving. If there is no suggested action, the safe driving guidance control may be terminated after displaying a message such as "You are driving safely and well. Keep it up."

[0044] In step S133, the notification control unit 19 implements the proposed action determined by the proposed action determination unit 16. This encourages the driver to implement the safety action proposed as the proposed action in similar situations from the next time onwards. For example, if the target area is an intersection and the proposed action is to prepare to brake, a message such as "Preparing to brake at an intersection will result in safer driving" is displayed on the display.

[0045] The method of proposing the suggested behavior is not limited to the above example, and the suggested behavior may be proposed by notifying the driver of the safe behavior that has been implemented in conjunction with the proposed behavior. For example, a message such as "You took your foot off the accelerator at the intersection properly. Next, it would be good if you could prepare to brake," may be displayed, and a sound effect that gives the impression that the driver has achieved the accelerator release may be output from a speaker. By notifying the driver of the safe behavior that has been implemented in conjunction with the proposed behavior, it becomes easier for the driver to maintain a positive attitude toward behavioral changes to achieve safe driving. This makes it easier for the driver to accept the proposed behavior.

[0046] In addition, a notification may be provided along with the proposed actions to indicate the number of safe actions that have been implemented and the number of safe actions set in the target area. For example, assume that the number of safe actions set in the target area is four and the number of safe actions that have been implemented is one. In this case, three of the four marks are displayed in gray and one mark is displayed in green. This allows the driver to intuitively understand to what extent the driver has been able to implement safe actions. After the proposed actions are implemented, the safe driving guidance control is terminated. However, the series of controls from the start to the end of the safe driving guidance control is repeated from the start to the end of driving.

[0047] By repeating the safe driving guidance control, suggested actions are repeatedly presented in similar situations until the driver is able to perform the suggested safety behavior. It is expected that repeated suggestions will gradually change the driver's behavior, leading to gradual changes in the content of the suggestions. In other words, even a driver who was initially unable to perform all of the safety behaviors will be able to perform all of them by gradually implementing each of the suggested actions. For example, consider a scenario in which the ease of implementation decreases in the order of accelerator release, brake preparation, brake application, and surrounding area check. In this case, by suggesting the easiest option, accelerator release, the driver's behavior will be changed so that the driver can perform accelerator release in the same target area from the next time onwards. Once the driver is able to perform accelerator release, accelerator release is no longer considered an unimplemented safety behavior, and the next easiest option, brake preparation, will be suggested. In this way, the driver's behavior can be gradually changed. It is known that people tend to be more accepting of subsequent suggestions once they have received one. The safe driving guidance control described above is a proposal method that takes advantage of this property and can be said to employ a proposal method known as the stepwise request method.

[0048] The effects of the above-described embodiment will be described below. According to the above-described embodiment, when there are multiple safe actions that the driver has not performed, the suggested action determiner 16 determines the safe action that is easiest to perform as the suggested action. Therefore, the driver is more likely to perform the suggested action than when a safe action that is difficult for the driver to perform is determined and proposed as the suggested action. Therefore, it is easier to get the driver to perform specific actions to guide them toward safe driving. Therefore, it is possible to provide a safe driving guidance device 10 that easily guides the driver's behavior toward safe driving.

[0049] By making safe actions that are easy to implement into suggested actions and not making difficult actions into suggested actions, it is possible to gradually guide drivers toward safe driving. In other words, by adopting a suggestion method called the step-by-step request method, it is possible to make it easier for drivers to accept not only the first suggestion, but also the second and subsequent suggestions. For this reason, it is easier to make step-by-step suggestions in multiple steps and ultimately have all suggestions accepted. Therefore, it is easier to guide drivers toward safe driving.

[0050] The notification control unit 19 proposes the suggested actions to the driver, but does not propose safety actions other than the suggested actions to the driver, even if the safety actions were not performed by the driver. Therefore, the driver is more likely to perform the suggested actions than when all safety actions not performed by the driver are proposed at once.

[0051] The notification control unit 19 makes a suggested action after the vehicle leaves the target area. This prevents the suggested action from being made before the vehicle leaves the target area. This allows the driver to reflect on their driving after leaving the target area, where more careful driving is required than in non-target areas, and to be guided to safe driving. In addition to making a suggestion after leaving the exit area, the suggested action that was proposed in the most recent target area may be suggested again when the vehicle enters the target area. This makes it easier for the driver to remember to take the suggested action and to take the suggested action.

[0052] The memory unit 12 stores safety actions into broad categories of actions and smaller categories of actions that are more finely divided than the broad categories of actions. Therefore, even similar safety actions can be treated as information with different levels of granularity. Therefore, when suggesting safety actions to the driver, it is possible to switch between proposing unspecified broad categories of actions and proposing small categories of actions that are more finely divided. Therefore, compared to a case where safety actions are not stored separately as broad categories of actions and small categories of actions, a wider variety of suggestions can be secured, making it easier to make suggestions that are suitable for the driver.

[0053] In step S126, the case where one safety action with the highest ease of implementation is selected and determined as the suggested action has been described as an example, but the method of determining the suggested action is not limited to this. A plurality of safety actions, including the safety action with the highest ease of implementation, may be collectively determined as the suggested action. For example, assume that moving the foot toward the brake pedal in preparation for braking is the safe action with the highest ease of implementation. In this case, the suggested action may be a combination of two safety actions for braking preparation, namely, moving the foot toward the brake pedal and placing the foot on the brake pedal. This results in multiple safety actions being suggested together. Therefore, compared to suggesting only one safety action, it is easier to reduce the number of suggestions until all unimplemented safety actions are performed by the driver. In other words, compared to suggesting only one safety action, it is easier to quickly guide the driver to drive safely.

[0054] (Second embodiment) This embodiment is a modification based on the preceding embodiment, and determines the ease of implementation based on the magnitude of the psychological cost.

[0055] 4, the safe driving guidance system 1 includes a server 240. The server 240 includes a database of map information including information on whether an area is a target area. The server 240 includes a database of safe behaviors including information on safe behaviors for each target area. The server 240 includes a database of driver information including the age, gender, driving frequency, driving history, injury information, and past tendency to perform safe behaviors for each driver.

[0056] The server 240 is connected to the safe driving guidance device 10. The safe driving guidance device 10 communicates with the server 240, receives necessary information from the server 240, and transmits information to the server 240 to be stored.

[0057] The safe driving guidance device 10 includes a cost determination unit 213 , a driver information acquisition unit 217 , a proposal condition setting unit 218 , and a driving situation acquisition unit 221 .

[0058] The cost determination unit 213 determines the psychological cost of performing each of the major and minor category safety behaviors. The psychological cost can be determined through an experiment using a driving simulator. The experiment involves driving a target area without any knowledge during the first driving session, and driving the target area with a focus on safe driving during the second driving session. The results of whether or not a safety behavior was performed during each of the two driving sessions are tallied. To achieve a focus on safe driving, for example, a method can be used in which the driver completes a questionnaire regarding their own driving evaluation and the safety level of their usual driving. The greater the proportion of safety behaviors that could not be performed during the first driving session but could be performed during the second driving session, the easier it is to change the driver's driving behavior. In other words, the greater the proportion of safety behaviors that could be performed during the second driving session compared to the first driving session, the lower the psychological cost of the safety behavior.

[0059] The method for determining the psychological cost is not limited to the above-described method. For example, the psychological cost may be determined based on the number of actions included in a safety behavior. In this case, the greater the number of actions included in a safety behavior, the more likely the driver is to feel resistance, and therefore the psychological cost is determined to be higher. However, the degree of resistance felt depending on the number of actions included in a safety behavior varies depending on the driver. For example, for a driver who is inexperienced in driving, the greater the number of actions included in a safety behavior, the more difficult it is to perform the safety behavior, and the greater the resistance felt by the driver. On the other hand, for a driver who is accustomed to driving, the greater the number of actions included in a safety behavior, and the less resistance felt by the driver. For this reason, when determining the psychological cost, it is preferable to determine the psychological cost taking into account the degree to which each driver feels resistance.

[0060] The driver information acquisition unit 217 acquires information about the driver. As the driver information, information such as age, gender, driving frequency, driving history, injury status, past tendency to perform safe behaviors, emotions while driving, and concentration level while driving can be adopted. The driver information acquisition unit 217 can acquire driver information input by the driver in advance. The driver information acquisition unit 217 can acquire the tendency to perform safe behaviors by grasping the past suggestion status and safety behavior implementation status for the same driver. The driver information acquisition unit 217 can acquire information such as emotions while driving and concentration level while driving from the recognition results of the driver status monitor.

[0061] The proposal condition setting unit 218 sets proposal conditions that are conditions for whether or not to propose a proposed action. By making a proposal when the proposal conditions are met and not making a proposal when the proposal conditions are not met, it is possible to appropriately control the frequency of making proposals.

[0062] The driving condition acquisition unit 221 acquires the driving conditions of the vehicle. The driving conditions include information about driving behavior such as whether to go straight or turn right or left. The driving conditions include information about driving times such as school commute times and evenings. The driving conditions include information about weather such as sunny or rainy weather. The driving conditions include information about driving seasons such as summer vacation and the New Year holidays. The driving conditions include information about the driving area such as traffic volume and whether or not there are elementary schools.

[0063] Details of the safe driving guidance control using the safe driving guidance device 10 in the second embodiment will be described below. However, the description will focus on parts that are different from the above-described embodiment, and explanations of parts that are the same as the above-described embodiment may be omitted.

[0064] In FIG. 5, if it is determined in step S113 that the user has exited the target area, the process proceeds to step S220.

[0065] In step S220, the proposed action determination unit 16 determines a proposed action to be proposed to the driver immediately after the driver has left the target area. Details of the method for determining this proposed action will be described below.

[0066] 6, when the determination of the suggested action starts, in step S121, it is determined whether or not there is any unimplemented safety action in the target area, and if there is an unimplemented safety action, the process proceeds to step S223. On the other hand, if there is no unimplemented safety action, the process proceeds to step S127 to determine that there is no suggested action, and then proceeds to step S131.

[0067] In step S223, driver information acquisition unit 217 acquires driver information such as age, sex, driving frequency, driving history, injury status, and past tendency to take safe actions. After acquiring the driver information, the process proceeds to step S224.

[0068] In step S224, the psychological cost of the unexecuted safety behavior is determined by the cost determination unit 213. If there are multiple unexecuted safety behaviors, the psychological costs are determined for all of the unexecuted safety behaviors.

[0069] The psychological cost is determined based on driver information. That is, when a driver is suggested to take a certain safety action, the psychological cost is determined based on the degree of resistance the driver feels toward that action. The greater the resistance, the higher the psychological cost is determined to be.

[0070] For example, let's assume that elderly people tend to be more resistant to checking their surroundings, which is one of the safety behaviors. In this case, the system determines whether the driver is elderly or not based on their age, and determines that the psychological cost of checking their surroundings is higher if the driver is elderly than if they are not.

[0071] For example, let's assume that a novice driver tends to feel a strong resistance to preparing to brake, which is one of the safety behaviors. In this case, the system determines whether the driver is a novice based on the driver's driving frequency and driving history, and determines that the psychological cost of preparing to brake is higher for beginners than for non-beginners.

[0072] For example, the psychological cost of a safety behavior that is likely to be easily performed based on the driver's tendency to perform safety behaviors in the past is determined to be low. Whether a safety behavior is likely to be easy to perform can be determined based on the number of times the safety behavior has been performed in the past. For example, a safety behavior that the driver has performed a sufficient number of times in the past can be determined to be easy to perform. On the other hand, a safety behavior that the driver has never performed in the past or has performed extremely infrequently is determined to be difficult to perform, and the psychological cost of that safety behavior is determined to be high. After determining the psychological cost, proceed to step S225.

[0073] In step S225, the implementation ease determination unit 14 determines the implementation ease of safety behaviors that have not yet been implemented in the target area. The implementation ease determination unit 14 determines the implementation ease according to the level of the psychological cost determined by the cost determination unit 213. In other words, the lower the psychological cost, the easier it is to implement. The implementation ease may be determined based solely on the psychological cost, or may be determined comprehensively including factors other than the psychological cost. After determining the implementation ease of the safety behavior, the process proceeds to step S225A.

[0074] In step S225A, the driving status of the vehicle is acquired by the driving status acquisition unit 221. For example, the driving status may include information such as driving operation, driving date and time, weather, driving area, etc. After acquiring the driving status, the process proceeds to step S226.

[0075] In step S226, the proposed action determination unit 16 determines a proposed action to be proposed to the driver. The proposed action determination unit 16 determines the proposed action by switching between a major category action and a minor category action for the driving action to be proposed, based on the driver information and the driving situation.

[0076] The following describes a case where the proposed action is switched between a major category action and a minor category action based on driver information. If the driver is a beginner who is not used to driving, it is determined that the driver is likely to cause an accident, and the proposed action is set to a major category action. On the other hand, if the driver is an experienced driver who is used to driving, it is determined that the driver is not likely to cause an accident, and the proposed action is set to a minor category action.

[0077] The following describes a case where the proposed action is switched between a major category action and a minor category action based on the driving situation. If the driving date and time is in the evening and the driving area is near an elementary school, it is determined that the situation is prone to accidents, and the proposed action is set to a major category action. On the other hand, if the driving date and time is at night on a weekday, it is determined that the situation is unlikely to result in an accident, and the proposed action is set to a minor category action.

[0078] The following describes a case where the proposed action is switched between a major category action and a minor category action based on both driver information and driving situation information. If the driver has little experience driving on snowy roads and the weather is snowy, it is determined that the situation is prone to accidents, and the proposed action is set to a major category action. On the other hand, if the driver has much experience driving on snowy roads or the weather is not snowy, it is determined that the situation is not prone to accidents, and the proposed action is set to a minor category action.

[0079] If it is decided that the proposed action will be a major category action, one safe action that has the highest ease of implementation as determined by the implementation ease determination unit 14 is selected from the major category actions and decided as the proposed action. On the other hand, if it is decided that the proposed action will be a minor category action, one safe action that has the highest ease of implementation as determined by the implementation ease determination unit 14 is selected from the minor category actions and decided as the proposed action. After deciding on the proposed action, proceed to step S131.

[0080] 5, it is determined whether or not there is a suggested action, and if there is a suggested action, the process proceeds to step S232. On the other hand, if there is no suggested action, the process proceeds to step S239.

[0081] In step S239, the notification control unit 19 notifies the driver of the safety actions performed by the driver in the target area as driver actions. For example, a message such as "All safety actions that should be performed when turning right at an intersection have been performed. Excellent." may be displayed on the display. However, rather than notifying the driver of the driver's actions every time, it is preferable to notify the driver of the driver's actions when there are no unperformed safety actions in the same target area and specific conditions are met. One specific condition that can be used is the first time there are no unperformed safety actions. Another specific condition that can be used is when the number of unperformed safety actions increases and then all unperformed safety actions are gone. This embodiment can reduce the frequency of notification of the driver's actions, making it easier to prevent the driver from feeling annoyed by the notification of the driver's actions. After the driver's actions are notified, the safe driving guidance control is terminated.

[0082] In step S232, it is determined whether the proposal conditions are satisfied. Here, the proposal conditions are conditions set by the proposal condition setting unit 218 for determining whether to make a proposal. The proposal conditions can be set such that a similar proposal has not been made in the past in the same target area. In other words, if this is the first proposal to the driver, it is determined that the proposal conditions are satisfied.

[0083] Another suggestion condition can be set as the number of times no suggestion has been made, which is the number of times a suggested action has not been made in the past. For example, suppose the suggestion condition is set to two times no suggestion has been made. In this case, the suggestion condition is not met the first and second times that a similar suggested action is judged to have been made, but the suggestion condition is met when it is judged to have been made the third time. The higher the number of times no suggestion has been made, the lower the suggestion frequency. The number of times no suggestion has been made is set for each safety action. In other words, the number of times no suggestion has been made is set for each of the following: taking the accelerator off, preparing the brakes, applying the brakes, and checking the surroundings.

[0084] The suggestion condition setting unit 218 sets the number of times that no suggestions have been made to the driver as the psychological cost of the safety behavior is lower, and sets the number of times that no suggestions have been made to the driver as the psychological cost is higher. For example, if the psychological cost of taking the accelerator off is lower than that of checking the surroundings, the number of times that no suggestions have been made to the driver as the accelerator off is set to 0, and the number of times that no suggestions have been made to check the surroundings is set to 3. As a result, suggestions to take the accelerator off are made every time, while suggestions to check the surroundings are made once in four times.

[0085] Furthermore, since the psychological cost of the same safety behavior varies depending on the driver, the number of times that suggestions are not made is changed when the psychological cost differs even for the same safety behavior. For example, for a driver who has a low psychological cost of checking the surroundings, the number of times that suggestions are not made to check the surroundings is set to two. On the other hand, for a driver who has a high psychological cost of checking the surroundings, the number of times that suggestions are not made to check the surroundings is set to three. This reduces the frequency of suggestions for safety behaviors that have a high psychological cost to the driver. If it is determined that the suggestion conditions are met, the process proceeds to step S133, where a suggestion is made, and then the process proceeds to step S234. On the other hand, if it is determined that the suggestion conditions are not met, the process proceeds to step S235.

[0086] In step S235, it is determined that the proposed action was not implemented because the proposal conditions were not met despite the existence of a proposed action, and the count of the number of times that no suggestions were made is incremented by one. The count of the number of times that no suggestions were made is performed for each type of safe action. For example, if taking the accelerator off is determined to be a proposed action but the proposal conditions are not met, the count of the number of times that no suggestions were made for taking the accelerator off is incremented by one. At this time, the count of the number of times that no suggestions were made for safety actions other than proposed actions, such as checking the surroundings, is not incremented. After incrementing the count of the number of times that no suggestions were made, the safe driving guidance control is terminated with the count of the number of times that no suggestions were made stored. The next time the safe driving guidance control is started, the safe driving guidance control will be started with the count of the number of times that no suggestions were made stored.

[0087] In step S234, the count of the number of times a proposed action has not been suggested is reset, assuming that a suggestion has been implemented. However, the count of the number of times a safety action that is not a proposed action has not been suggested is maintained. For example, if a suggestion to take the accelerator off is implemented, the count of the number of times that the accelerator off action has not been suggested is reset to zero. On the other hand, the count of the number of times that a safety action other than taking the accelerator off that has not been suggested, such as checking the surroundings, remains at the most recent value. After resetting the count of the number of times that a suggestion has not been implemented, proceed to step S240.

[0088] In step S240, the psychological cost is updated by the cost determination unit 213. Details of the method for updating the psychological cost will be explained below.

[0089] 7, when updating of the psychological cost starts, the driver information acquisition unit 217 acquires the driver's reaction to the suggestion in step S241. The driver's reaction can be acquired from the recognition result of the driver status monitor. After acquiring the driver's reaction, the process proceeds to step S242.

[0090] In step S242, the driver information acquisition unit 217 determines whether the driver's reaction to the suggestion is negative or not. Whether the driver's reaction is negative or not can be determined by appropriately combining the driver's behavior, facial expression, gaze transition, heart rate, pupil diameter, etc. For example, if the driver frowns or if anger is recognized, it can be determined that the reaction is negative. On the other hand, if the driver is smiling, it can be determined that the reaction is positive rather than negative.

[0091] The method of determining whether the driver's reaction to the suggestion is negative is not limited to the above example. For example, if actions such as clicking one's tongue or shaking one's legs are recognized, it can be determined that the reaction is negative. Also, if the driver is unable to perform the suggested action when driving in a similar target area after the current suggestion, it can be determined that the reaction is negative. If the driver's reaction to the suggestion is negative, the process proceeds to step S243. On the other hand, if the driver's reaction to the suggestion is not negative, the process proceeds to step S244.

[0092] In step S243, the cost determination unit 213 determines that the proposed action is a safety action that the driver is highly resistant to, and increases the psychological cost of the proposed action. As a result, the psychological cost of a similar safety action becomes higher, making it less likely to be determined as a safety action that is easy to implement next time. In other words, other safety actions are more likely to be suggested to the driver. For example, if the reaction to the suggestion to take the accelerator off is negative, the psychological cost of taking the accelerator off is increased, while the other psychological costs maintain their most recent values. After increasing the psychological cost of the safety action determined as the proposed action, the process proceeds to step S245.

[0093] In step S245, the proposed action determination unit 16 switches between proposing a major category action or a minor category action as the proposed action. For example, if the driver's reaction to the proposal when the major category action is determined as the proposed action is negative, the next proposal will be switched to determining the minor category action as the proposed action. On the other hand, if the driver's reaction to the proposal when the minor category action is determined as the proposed action is negative, the next proposal will be switched to determining the major category action as the proposed action.

[0094] The need to switch between proposing a major category action and a minor category action is not limited to a configuration in which it is determined based on the driver's reaction to the most recent proposal. The need to switch may also be determined based on multiple reactions, including the reaction to the most recent proposal. For example, if minor category actions are continuously proposed and negative reactions from the driver are continuously obtained, the system may switch to the major category action. After switching between proposing a major category action and proposing a minor category action as the proposed action, the safe driving guidance control is terminated.

[0095] In step S244, the cost determination unit 213 determines that the proposed action is a safe action that the driver feels little resistance to, and reduces the psychological cost of the proposed action. This reduces the psychological cost for a similar safe action, making it more likely that the proposed action will be determined as a safe action that is easier to implement in the future. For example, if the reaction to the suggestion to take the accelerator off is not negative, the psychological cost of taking the accelerator off is reduced, while the other psychological costs maintain their most recent values. After reducing the psychological cost of the safe action determined as the proposed action, the safe driving guidance control is terminated with the reduced psychological cost stored.

[0096] The effects of the above-described embodiment will be described below. According to the above-described embodiment, the feasibility determination unit 14 determines that the lower the psychological cost determined by the cost determination unit 213, the easier it is to perform a driving action. Therefore, compared to determining the feasibility without taking the psychological cost into consideration, it is easier to appropriately determine a driving action that the driver feels is easy to perform.

[0097] The proposal condition setting unit 218 sets the proposal conditions so that the lower the psychological cost, the more frequently the proposed action is proposed. Therefore, it is easier to increase the frequency at which proposed actions that have a low psychological cost and are easy for the driver to accept are proposed compared to proposed actions that have a high psychological cost and are difficult for the driver to accept. Therefore, it is easy to prevent proposed actions that have a high psychological cost and are difficult for the driver to accept from being proposed frequently, which makes it easier to prevent the driver from feeling bothered by the proposals.

[0098] The cost determination unit 213 determines the psychological cost based on the driver information acquired by the driver information acquisition unit 217. Therefore, compared to when the psychological cost is determined without being based on the driver information, the cost determination unit 213 can determine the psychological cost taking into consideration many more factors. Therefore, it is easy to determine an appropriate psychological cost.

[0099] The cost determination unit 213 determines the psychological cost based on at least one of the driver's age, gender, driving frequency, and driving history as driver information. Therefore, it is easier to determine an appropriate psychological cost compared to determining the psychological cost without based on age, gender, driving frequency, and driving history information. For example, by determining the psychological cost based on age, if the driver is elderly, the psychological cost can be determined based on the psychological cost tendency common to elderly people. Furthermore, by determining the psychological cost based on driving frequency and driving history, if the driver is a novice driver, the psychological cost can be determined based on the psychological cost tendency common to novice drivers.

[0100] The cost determination unit 213 determines the psychological cost based on information indicating the past tendency of the driver to take safe actions as driver information. Therefore, it is easier to determine an appropriate psychological cost compared to when the psychological cost is determined without being based on the past tendency of the driver to take safe actions.

[0101] The cost determination unit 213 determines the psychological cost based on information indicating the driver's reaction when a safe action is suggested by the notification control unit 19 as driver information. Therefore, the psychological cost can be changed based on the driver's reaction when a safe action is suggested. For example, if the driver's reaction when a safe action is suggested is negative, it can be determined that the driver feels resistance to the suggestion, and the psychological cost can be increased. On the other hand, if the driver's reaction when a safe action is suggested is not negative, it can be determined that the driver does not feel resistance to the suggestion, and the psychological cost can be decreased. Therefore, it is easier to determine an appropriate psychological cost compared to determining the psychological cost without based on the driver's reaction when a safe action is suggested.

[0102] The proposed action determination unit 16 switches between determining a major category action as the proposed action and determining a minor category action as the proposed action based on the driving situation. Therefore, the proposed action can be proposed at an appropriate granularity depending on the driving situation.

[0103] The proposed action determination unit 16 switches between determining a major category action as a proposed action and determining a minor category action as a proposed action based on the driver information. Therefore, the proposed action can be proposed at an appropriate granularity according to the driver information.

[0104] The proposed action determination unit 16 switches between determining a major category action as a proposed action and determining a minor category action as a proposed action based on information indicating the driver's reaction when a safety action is proposed by the notification control unit 19. Therefore, it is possible to determine whether the driver wants a major category action or a minor category action to be proposed as a proposed action, taking the driver's reaction into consideration. Therefore, it is easier to suggest an appropriate safety action compared to when determining whether to propose a major category action or a minor category action regardless of the driver's reaction.

[0105] Although the above description takes as an example a case where safety behaviors are set for each target area, this is not limited to the above example. For example, even within the same target area, a distinction may be made between a scene in which the driver travels straight through an intersection and a scene in which the driver turns right or left at an intersection, and safety behaviors may be set for each scene. The scenes to be distinguished are not limited to passing through an intersection or turning right or left at an intersection, but may also be distinguished for scenes requiring different driving behaviors, such as lane changes and merging. Scenes may also be distinguished by time of day, such as school commute times, evening, or night. Scenes may also be distinguished by weather, such as sunny, rainy, or snowy weather. Scenes may also be distinguished by season, such as summer vacation, when many drivers who do not usually drive are expected to drive, or weekdays. Scenes may also be distinguished by surrounding environment, such as areas with heavy traffic, areas with light traffic, areas with many children, or areas with few children. By distinguishing between scenes in detail and setting safety behaviors individually for each scene in this way, it is possible to set appropriate safety behaviors for each specific scene and propose suggested actions. This makes it easier to guide drivers to drive safely.

[0106] In addition, it is preferable to set the frequency of suggestions high in scenes where it is expected that an accident is likely to occur, and set the frequency of suggestions low in scenes where it is expected that an accident is unlikely to occur. According to this, suggestions will be made more frequently in scenes where it is expected that an accident is likely to occur than in other cases, making it easier to complete guidance to safe driving at an earlier timing. On the other hand, suggestions will be made less frequently in scenes where it is expected that an accident is unlikely to occur than in other cases, making it possible to prevent the suggestions from being too frequent and annoying.

[0107] Furthermore, in scenes where accidents are expected to occur more frequently, it is preferable to set more actions that can be included in safety behaviors than in scenes where accidents are expected to occur less frequently. In other words, it is preferable to set safety behaviors that are coarse-grained and do not subdivide safety behaviors as much as possible. In other words, it is preferable to adopt broad categories of actions as safety behaviors rather than small categories of actions. As a result, in scenes where accidents are expected to occur more frequently, safety behaviors that include more actions can be suggested in one proposal than in other cases. This makes it easier to complete guidance to safe driving at an earlier timing. On the other hand, in scenes where accidents are expected to occur less frequently, the number of actions included in one proposal is smaller than in other cases. This makes it easier for drivers to accept the proposals, and makes it easier to steadily progress in guiding drivers to safe driving.

[0108] (Other embodiments) The disclosure in this specification and drawings, etc. is not limited to the exemplified embodiments. The disclosure encompasses the exemplified embodiments and modifications thereto by those skilled in the art. For example, the disclosure is not limited to the combinations of parts and / or elements shown in the embodiments. The disclosure can be implemented in various combinations. The disclosure can have additional parts that can be added to the embodiments. The disclosure encompasses the omission of parts and / or elements from the embodiments. The disclosure encompasses the substitution or combination of parts and / or elements between one embodiment and another embodiment. The disclosed technical scope is not limited to the description of the embodiments. Some disclosed technical scopes are defined by the claims, and should be interpreted as including all modifications within the meaning and scope equivalent to the claims.

[0109] The disclosure in the specification, drawings, etc. is not limited by the claims. The disclosure in the specification, drawings, etc. encompasses the technical ideas described in the claims, and extends to more diverse and broader technical ideas than the technical ideas described in the claims. Therefore, various technical ideas can be extracted from the disclosure in the specification, drawings, etc. without being bound by the claims.

[0110] The control unit and method for implementing the safe driving guidance control described in the present disclosure may be implemented by a special-purpose computer having a processor programmed to execute one or more functions embodied in a computer program. Alternatively, the device and method described in the present disclosure may be implemented by a special-purpose hardware logic circuit. Alternatively, the device and method described in the present disclosure may be implemented by one or more special-purpose computers configured by a combination of a processor executing a computer program and one or more hardware logic circuits. Furthermore, the computer program may be stored as instructions executed by a computer on a computer-readable non-transitory tangible storage medium. [Explanation of symbols]

[0111] 1 Safe driving guidance system, 10 Safe driving guidance device, 11 Area determination unit, 12 Memory unit, 14 Implementation ease determination unit, 15 Action determination unit, 16 Proposed action determination unit, 19 Notification control unit, 50 Notification device, 213 Cost determination unit, 217 Driver information acquisition unit, 218 Proposed condition setting unit, 221 Driving situation acquisition unit

Claims

1. an area determination unit (11) that determines whether or not the vehicle is located within a target area; a storage unit (12) that stores a plurality of safety actions set for each target area; an implementability determining unit (14) that determines the implementability of the plurality of safety behaviors; a behavior determination unit (15) that determines whether the driver has performed the safety behavior within the target area; A suggested action determination unit (16) that determines a suggested action, which is a safety action to be suggested to the driver to perform, from among the safety actions that the action determination unit has determined not to have performed; a notification control unit (19) that controls the notification device (50) to suggest the proposed action determined by the proposed action determination unit to the driver, and not to suggest to the driver any safety action other than the proposed action, even if the safety action is a safety action that the driver has not performed; The safety driving guidance device, wherein the suggested action determination unit determines the safety action that is easiest to implement as the suggested action when there are multiple safe actions that the driver has not implemented.

2. a cost determination unit (213) that sets a psychological cost for each safety behavior; The safe driving guidance device according to claim 1 , wherein the implementation ease determining unit determines that the lower the psychological cost determined by the cost determining unit, the easier it is to implement.

3. a proposal condition setting unit (218) that sets proposal conditions for determining whether or not to propose the proposed action; The safe driving guidance device according to claim 2 , wherein the suggestion condition setting unit sets the suggestion condition so that the lower the psychological cost, the more frequently the suggested action is suggested.

4. a driver information acquisition unit (217) that acquires driver information that is information about the driver; The safe driving guidance device according to claim 2 or 3, wherein the cost determination unit determines the psychological cost based on the driver information acquired by the driver information acquisition unit.

5. 5. The safe driving guidance device according to claim 4, wherein the driver information includes at least one of information on the driver's age, sex, driving frequency, and driving history.

6. The safe driving guidance device according to claim 4 , wherein the driver information includes information indicating a tendency of the driver to take the safe behavior in the past.

7. The safe driving guidance device according to claim 4 , wherein the driver information includes information indicating a reaction of the driver when the safety behavior is suggested by the notification control unit.

8. 4. The safe driving guidance device according to claim 2, wherein the storage unit stores the safe behavior into a broad category of behaviors and a narrower category of behaviors than the broad category of behaviors.

9. A driving status acquisition unit (221) for acquiring a driving status of the vehicle is provided, The safe driving guidance device according to claim 8 , wherein the suggested action determination unit switches between determining the major section action as the suggested action and determining the minor section action as the suggested action based on the driving situation.

10. a driver information acquisition unit (217) that acquires driver information that is information about the driver; The safe driving guidance device according to claim 8 , wherein the suggested action determination unit switches between determining the major category action as the suggested action and determining the minor category action as the suggested action based on the driver information.

11. The safe driving guidance device of claim 10, wherein the proposed action determination unit switches between determining the major category action as the proposed action or the minor category action as the proposed action based on information indicating the driver's reaction when the safety action is proposed by the notification control unit.

Images