Seeing Machines Limited (AIM: SEE), the advanced computer vision technology company that designs AI-powered operator monitoring systems to improve transport safety, announced that the Guardian Generation 3 driver safety system has been recognised for its exceptional design and innovation as part of the prestigious 2024 Good Design Awards, receiving the Winner Accolade in the Product Design category. Guardian Generation 3 is the latest version of Seeing Machines’ driver fatigue and distraction technology solution. It leverages the company’s automotive-grade technology with early drowsiness and refined microsleep detection alongside eye-tracking to protect drivers from the risks associated with drowsy and distracted driving. The theme of this year’s Awards, “The Design Effect”, underscored the crucial role design plays in shaping better products, services, spaces, and experiences while driving the transition to a more sustainable, less carbon-intensive future. The Awards also highlighted how design not only enhances functionality and aesthetics but can contribute significantly to business success and societal advancement.

This year’s entries were rigorously evaluated by a panel of more than 80 distinguished Jurors from around the globe, including designers, engineers, architects, and industry leaders. The Jury praised Guardian Generation 3 by Seeing Machines commenting:

“Seeing Machines’ Guardian Generation 3 reduces drowsy driving risks by over 94% with advanced drowsiness and distraction detection. It alerts drivers in real-time, enhancing safety in commercial vehicles. The Jury praises the Guardian Generation 3 for its groundbreaking technology and meticulous industrial design. Its focus on reducing driving risks and improving safety through advanced detection systems represents a significant advancement in vehicle safety technology. Great to see this leading-edge technology coupled with world-class design. Well done.”

Rachel Wye, Managing Director of Good Design Australia, remarked, “This year’s Awards reflect the profound ripple effects that exceptional design can have on people, place and planet. The projects honoured in these Awards exemplify how thoughtful design can drive meaningful change, not only enhancing user experiences and the way people interact with the world, but also contributing to a more sustainable and more prosperous future. The Australian Good Design Awards are proud to recognise the truly inspirational work that is being done across different design disciplines, sectors and industries in Australia and overseas.”

Max Verberne, GM Aftermarket at Seeing Machines, commented: “Being recognised by the 2024 Good Design Awards is testament to the industry-leading, AI-driven technology we have developed over the past 20+ years, used to enhance driver safety in the transport and logistics sector. We are proud to hear the Juror’s comments, which underline our strategic mission to reduce road accidents and get people home safely.”

Guardian Generation 3, launched at CES 2024, has been independently tested and confirmed to comply with Europe’s General Safety Regulation (GSR). In 2023, it is estimated that over 330,000 commercial vehicles were manufactured¹, and every vehicle will need technology that reliably detects and responds to driver drowsiness this year, escalating to distraction from 2026. Seeing Machines remains at the forefront of driving innovation in driver monitoring technology, enabling OEMs to meet and exceed regulatory requirements while enhancing safety across diverse vehicle applications.

Seeing Machines has started to roll out Guardian Generation 3 in Europe, targeting commercial vehicle OEMs as they meet GSR requirements. The initial focus will be to ensure compliance with Driver Drowsiness and Attention Warning, followed by Advanced Driver Distraction Warning.

¹Frost & Sullivan, “Global Light, Medium, and Heavy Commercial Vehicle Outlook 2023”

The post Guardian Generation 3 Recognised in Good Design Awards appeared first on Seeing Machines.

Driver fatigue is a serious yet often underestimated threat to road safety. With the pace of modern life, more people are driving while tired, unaware of the significant risks this poses to themselves and others.

Hendy Car & Van Store has pulled together an excellent guide for understanding driver fatigue, outlined in the article below.

As noted in the guide, fatigue may be responsible for up to 20% of road accidents, a statistic that highlights the importance of understanding and addressing this issue.

We’ve outlined some of the key points to recognise and prevent driver fatigue from the guide and outlined the role that technology can play to combat it. By staying alert and rested, you not only protect yourself but also everyone else on the road.

What causes driver fatigue?

Driver fatigue can stem from a range of preventable and unpreventable factors, with sleep deprivation being one of the most common. When drivers don’t get enough sleep, they are more likely to experience lapses in concentration, slower reaction times, and impaired judgment. The circadian rhythm, which dictates our sleep-wake cycle, also plays a crucial role. For instance, driving during late night or early morning hours, when the body naturally expects to be asleep, can increase the risk of fatigue.

Long working hours and demanding jobs are other significant contributors. Drivers who work shifts or have irregular schedules are particularly vulnerable to fatigue. Additionally, the monotony of long drives, especially on highways, can lull drivers into a state of drowsiness.

Medical conditions such as sleep apnoea, diabetes, depression, anxiety and even coeliac disease can also be a contributing factor and should not be overlooked. Similarly, lifestyle choices such as diet, exercise and drug and alcohol use can have an effect on tiredness.

Often it can be a combination of factors, creating a perfect storm and leading to accidents that could otherwise be avoided.

Recognising the signs of fatigue

One of the challenges in addressing driver fatigue is that its symptoms can be subtle and easy to dismiss. Common signs include frequent yawning, blinking, heavy eyelids, difficulty concentrating, and drifting in and out of lanes. Microsleeps—brief moments of sleep that last only a few seconds—are particularly dangerous because they can occur without the driver realising it, leading to a complete loss of control over the vehicle.

Other warning signs include missing turns or exits, making marginal mistakes in depth perception, feeling irritable or restless, and struggling to keep your head up. It’s crucial for drivers to pay attention to these signs and take them seriously. Ignoring them can lead to severe consequences, not just for the driver but for everyone on the road.

Preventing driver fatigue

Taking proactive steps to prevent fatigue is often the best approach. Unsurprisingly, one of the most effective strategies is ensuring you get enough sleep before a long drive. Experts recommend at least seven to eight hours of quality sleep per night. Some techniques to help you get quality rest include implementing a regular sleep routine, creating a conducive sleeping environment and making your bed comfortable.

If you’re planning a long journey, it’s important to stay hydrated and schedule regular breaks – ideally, every 2 or 3 hours – to rest and recharge. You should also look at your physical health and diet to ensure you are getting the right types of nutrients needed to fuel your body and boost your energy levels.

Another useful tip is to avoid driving during times when you’d normally be asleep. If possible, plan your trips during the day when you’re naturally more alert. If you find yourself getting tired, pull over and rest. It might feel inconvenient at the moment, but it’s far better to arrive late than to risk an accident.

The role of technology

Advancements in vehicle technology are also playing a role in combating driver fatigue. Many modern cars are equipped with systems that monitor driver behaviour and detect signs of drowsiness. These systems can alert the driver with visual, auditory and/or haptic warnings, prompting them to take a break.

Similarly, solutions like Guardian can be retrospectively installed into heavy vehicles such as trucks and buses, which is particularly important. As noted in the guide, around 40% of sleep-related accidents involve commercial drivers.

Conclusion: Stay Awake, Stay Alive

Driver fatigue is a critical road safety issue that demands attention. By understanding its causes, recognising the warning signs, and taking proactive steps to prevent it, drivers can significantly reduce the risk of fatigue-related accidents. The message is simple: stay awake, stay alive. Prioritising rest and recognising when you’re too tired to drive can save lives – yours and others.

For more in-depth information on driver fatigue and how to stay safe on the road, you can view Hendy Car & Van Store’s essential road safety guide for understanding driver fatigue.

The post Stay Awake, Stay Alive: Understanding Driver Fatigue appeared first on Seeing Machines.

The European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) introduced a new protocol that is helping to drive adoption of driver state monitoring (DSM) systems in the automotive industry. It defines two broad categories of driver distraction and set requirements to detect these behaviours.

Our Human Factors team collaborated on a study to examine the prevalence of Euro NCAP defined distraction behaviours in naturalistic driving. This blog provides a summary of the findings in the following paper:

Megan Mulhall, Kyle Wilson, Shiyan Yang, Jonny Kuo, Tracey Sletten, Clare Anderson, Mark E. Howard, Shantha Rajaratnam, Michelle Magee, Allison Collins, and Michael G. Lenné. 2023. European NCAP Driver State Monitoring Protocols: Prevalence of Distraction in Naturalistic Driving. Human Factors, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208231194543

Driver distraction is a major cause of motor vehicle crashes worldwide, due to factors such as mobile phones and complex infotainment systems, and an increased reliance on growing levels of vehicle automation. While regulations have been put in place to address this issue, real-time distraction management has not been technologically feasible until recently.

Driver state monitoring (DSM) using camera-based systems was introduced as a practical solution to detecting driver distraction. However, despite the rapid maturation of DSM technologies, widespread adoption in the automotive industry has been slow and primarily limited to high-end luxury vehicles.

In 2023, the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) implemented a DSM system Test and Assessment protocol, setting requirements based on detection difficulty and behavioural complexity. Driver distraction is a core component of the Euro NCAP protocol and classified in two broad categories: long distraction – single long glances away (LGA) from the road – and short distraction – shorter multi-glance distraction, also known as visual attention time sharing (VATS).

This study investigated the prevalence of these distraction behaviours as defined by Euro NCAP in naturalistic driving, which had not previously been examined, and analysed the application of the Euro NCAP guidelines in real-world driving scenarios. This is important as Euro NCAP’s protocol is not only driving adoption of DSM systems across the automotive industry, but setting the standard in minimal tracking requirements.

The study found that Euro NCAP defined distraction behaviours occur in naturalistic driving, with long distraction events occurring once every 1.1 hours and short distraction occurring every 4.8 hours.

Long distraction

Euro NCAP defines a single LGA as lasting 3 seconds or longer, and further sub-categorises it into whether they are looking at driving-related (e.g. rear mirror) or nondriving-related (e.g. infotainment system) regions in the vehicle.

Glances to nondriving-related regions of longer than 2 seconds double the risk of a crash, yet despite this long distraction events are a common behaviour. Research on LGAs to driving-related regions is less established, though long glances towards rear view mirrors appear to have a lower crash risk (and are potentially even protective).

However, implementing different time thresholds for driving-related and nondriving-related distractions requires the DSM system have a higher degree of accuracy in driver tracking. Differentiating between driving-related and nondriving-related regions is challenging, as they are often in close proximity. Systems that cannot reliably distinguish between these glance regions will have to use the same 3-second threshold for both regions, which will result in more frequent alerts for driving-related distractions, negatively impacting the user experience.

Short distraction

VATS involves drivers splitting their attention between the road and a secondary task (such as mobile phone use). Euro NCAP’s protocol defines it as a cumulative 10 seconds of looking away from the road within a 30-second window, where a driver does not return their gaze to the road for a minimum of 2 seconds.

VATS events are only required to include glances to nondriving-related regions. This means DSM systems that cannot distinguish between driving-related and nondriving-related glances may achieve full points for multi-glance VATS events, but only through also including driving-related regions. This is likely to have a major negative impact on user experience, through delivering alerts to drivers who are looking at driving-related regions and almost tripling the overall alerting rate.

Lizard and owl glances

Euro NCAP’s protocol requires detection of both ‘lizard’ and ‘owl’ glances to achieve maximum scores for distraction. Lizard glances involve minimal head movement, while owl glances are primarily made through movement of the head.

Tracking eye gaze is more challenging than head angle due to a smaller tracking target, but it is necessary to accurately detect certain glances, such as lizard glances (commonly associated with phone use). More sophisticated DSM technologies tend to use a combination of head angle and eye gaze tracking, whereas less sophisticated systems may rely on tracking head angle alone. The research suggests DSM systems that can only detect owl glances will miss a large proportion of distraction events, as lizard glances are more common. It is important to accurately monitor both types of glances, as they have different safety implications.

Drivers typically utilise lizard glance strategies (eye movement only) when engaging in long distraction.

Other distraction

There are distraction behaviours specified in Euro NCAP’s protocol that were not tested in the study, including body lean behaviours and noise factors. These factors may affect a system’s ability to detect distractions and impact the user experience.

Future research will examine how DSM of drowsiness and distraction affect driver crash risk and safety metrics in passenger vehicles. It is important to understand how DSM modifies driver behaviour and whether it enhances safety. In commercial vehicles, research by Fitzharris et al. (2017) found that monitoring driver drowsiness and delivering in-cabin alerts when it was detected reduced drowsiness events by 66%. Driver perception and acceptance of DSM technology should also be considered.

Overall, the study highlights the importance of accurately tracking and differentiating between distraction events and the need for further research on the impact of DSM on driver behaviour and safety.

The implementation of DSM in accordance with Euro NCAP’s protocol will result in a varying number of alerts, depending on tracking capability (lizard and owl) and the ability to distinguish driving-related from nondriving-related glance regions.

The post Prevalence of Euro NCAP Defined Distraction in Naturalistic Driving appeared first on Seeing Machines.

“MPC Kinetic was not immune to instances where drivers had become distracted and tired leading to breaches of the company’s speeding, braking and driving behaviour policy” said Danny Crooks, Group Manager – Safety, Assurance and Environment.

Given the paramount importance of safety, MPC Kinetic made safe driving its number one Core Mandatory Requirement, introducing enhanced safe driving rules and innovative initiatives for their fleet. One of these crucial initiatives was the deployment of Guardian technology across all company vehicles to enable real-time monitoring and management of driver fatigue and distraction and improve safety.

“The installation of Guardian cameras had an immediate and positive effect, in that it alerted and provided clear evidence to MPC Kinetic’s Operations Teams of instances where drivers were distracted or showing signs of fatigue.”  

This capability allowed for accurate identification and management of at-risk drivers, facilitating timely interventions such as additional medical assessments, assistance, and enhanced safe driving training as needed.

Efficient Implementation and Workforce Adoption

To expedite the installation process, MPC Kinetic’s Land Transport Excellence Committee engaged third-party specialists to install Guardian while the workforce was on rest and relaxation. This approach ensured that installers had unrestricted access to the fleet, enabling the installation of units in approximately 380 vehicles over a 12-month period.

Understanding potential resistance from its workforce, MPC Kinetic proactively addressed concerns and myths about the new technology. Some of the issues raised by the workforce during early discussions with site teams included fears that the camera was always recording and management could hear their conversations, that the in-cab sensor emits harmful UV rays, as well as privacy concerns around event footage.

Curious to know more? Check out our Guardian MythBusters video series!  

Through a series of engaging weekly SMS messages, the company dispelled misconceptions and highlighted the safety benefits of the Guardian system. This communication strategy included both serious messages and humorous responses to conspiracy theories, fostering a positive reception among employees.

A few examples included:

• “No, they’re CCTVs filming for a few seconds, not the ones used in the fake moon landing”
• “No, wearing a fake moustache while driving won’t work, you’re not Jason Bourne”
• “Yes, you can still scoff a big bag of dimmies in your cab, the cameras don’t judge”.

Competitive Advantage and Future Outlook

MPC Kinetic’s commitment to driver safety extends beyond internal benefits. By showcasing its investment in innovative safety technologies, the company strengthens its value proposition to clients. This dedication to safety not only enhances the wellbeing of its workforce but also provides a competitive edge in the industry, demonstrating MPC Kinetic’s leadership in adopting advanced safety measures.

Looking ahead, MPC Kinetic envisions a future where innovative technologies like Guardian and other in-vehicle monitoring systems become integral to fleet transportation, and their widespread adoption will continue to elevate safety standards across the industry.

“These systems have proven time and time again that they work and keep our people safe” concluded Crooks.

For MPC Kinetic, embracing technology such as Guardian is not just a strategic move; it is a commitment to the safety and wellbeing of its people, ensuring that every journey is a safe one. Learn more in this case study.

The post MPC Kinetic & Guardian: Enhancing Fleet Safety appeared first on Seeing Machines.

Our Human Factors staff collaborated on a research project to evaluate how different head-up display designs can help the driver stay aware of the vehicle and road while performing a non-driving related task during automated driving. This blog provides a summary of the findings in the following paper:

Michael A. Gerber, Ronald Schroeter, Daniel Johnson, Christian P. Janssen, Andry Rakotonirainy, Jonny Kuo, and Mike G. Lenné. 2024. An Eye Gaze Heatmap Analysis of Uncertainty Head-Up Display Designs for Conditional Automated Driving. In CHI ’24, May 11–16, 2024, Honolulu, HI, USA. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 16 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3613904.3642219

The rapid advancement of automated vehicles means the driving task – including monitoring the driving situation, making decisions, and controlling the vehicle – is transitioning from being the sole responsibility of the human driver toward a shared responsibility with the automated driving system. This shift takes many of the vehicle control tasks out of the hands of the human, yet still requires drivers to monitor the automation and act as a backup when it fails or reaches limitations.

In the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) driving automation taxonomy, Level 3 (L3) – also called conditional automation – largely frees the driver from supervision duties. SAE L3 driving systems are defined as capable of performing the complete driving task within the intended domain of operation and should request the human driver to act as a ‘fallback’ and take control when needed.

However, this definition poses a safety conundrum, as without responsibility for driving-related tasks, humans are enabled and enticed to perform non-driving related tasks (NDRAs). Even when NDRAs are not allowed, humans tend to still engage in them, as we currently see with mobile phone use.

These NDRAs can degrade a driver’s performance when taking over control due to a lack of situational awareness, having potential safety implications. The driver should therefore be kept “in the loop” – at least until driving automation technology improves to the point where no safety-critical transitions are required. As of today, this technology does not exist for vehicles which operate on public roads. This means that it is crucial for drivers to maintain situational awareness. The best way for drivers to do this is by directing sufficient visual attention to the forward roadway, monitoring the automation, and generally remaining engaged enough to notice any vehicle-related failures, should they occur.

This study evaluated different interventions designed to help the driver maintain situational awareness while attending to an NDRA on a head-up display during automated driving. These interventions build on research that highlights the benefit of sharing the “uncertainty” of the automated driving system (the automation’s reliability or confidence in managing the current driving situation) to the driver while they engage in an NDRA. Specifically, the study explores how different uncertainty design intervention concepts a) influence the eye-gaze behaviour of drivers while engaging in a NDRA, and b) impact usability.

Using a high-fidelity driving simulator, drivers watched entertaining videos (i.e., an NDRA) while the researchers compared three different uncertainty intervention designs:

1. Continuous display – a bar visualisation of uncertainty placed close to the video
2. Interruption – strategically pausing the video during uncertain situations to notify about uncertainty
3. Combination – a combination of both

The study found that interruptions led participants to divide their attention between monitoring the driving environment and entertainment, as opposed to focusing excessively on the NDRA. This improvement to monitoring behaviour was more pronounced in the combination intervention compared to interruption alone, suggesting that pre-warning interruptions have positive effects. Continuous display only (without interruptions) had negative effects, whereby drivers appeared to be distracted by the display but ignored the perceived “suggestion” to check their surroundings.

Furthermore, the different interventions did not significantly impact what participants remembered about the video (NDRA), implying their viewing experience was not overly compromised. There were also no differences between ratings of usability for the different interventions.

Intermittent interruptions may have safety benefits over placing additional peripheral displays without compromising usability.

The research concluded that uncertainty visualisation (display only) in combination with everyday NDRAs may reduce driving-related attention and lead to misjudgment of the situation. Furthermore, it was discovered that interruption-based interventions lead to task-interleaving between NDRA and monitoring the road. Combining the interruptions with an uncertainty visualisation seems to be a promising way to maintain a driver’s situational awareness, resulting in more frequent and voluntary interruptions of the NDRA. This heightened situational awareness could result in improved takeover readiness and safety performance, however further research is needed. Understanding the modes of interaction that promote driver situational awareness has implications for vehicle design and demonstrates the benefits of driver monitoring systems in supporting drivers’ attention on the road.

The post Evaluating Head-Up Display Designs for Conditional Automated Driving appeared first on Seeing Machines.

Shiyan Yang, Angus McKerral, Megan D. Mulhall, Michael G. Lenné, Pnina Gershon, and Bryan Reimer. 2023. Takeover Context Matters: Characterising Context of Takeovers in Naturalistic Driving using Super Cruise and Autopilot. In 15th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI ’23), September 18–22, 2023, Ingolstadt, Germany. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 11 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3580585.3606459

In today’s automotive market, vehicles equipped with Level 2 advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS) are becoming increasingly commonplace, largely due to growing regulatory requirements around the world. Of concern, however, is the increased tendency towards driver inattention due to the rapid proliferation of these technologies, despite advice to remain focused in order to supervise the system.

To manage this complacency, Driver Monitoring System (DMS) technology is used to support driver readiness for transfers of control (TOC); which is when ADAS is disengaged by the vehicle system, and the driver is required to take over control of the vehicle. To develop more effective and adaptative DMS solutions however, it is necessary to understand the context of takeovers in the real world.

Understanding the context and associated takeover behaviour is valuable for the continued evolution of DMS such that systems can become more adaptive to real-world dynamic environments and ensure enhanced safety support and driver experience.

In this study, the researchers examined driver-initiated takeover data from vehicles equipped with Cadillac’s Super Cruise and Tesla’s Autopilot ADAS. Specifically, the study sought to identify the types of takeovers in naturalistic driving, the characteristics of each takeover type, and how they were associated with contextual factors. Understanding how and when drivers takeover control enables DMS solutions to better predict an upcoming takeover event, estimate a driver’s takeover capacity, and integrate more effectively with other vehicle safety systems to reduce overall risk associated with transitions of control.

Contextual factors were extracted from camera videos, vehicle kinematics, and GPS data. Associations between these factors and the takeover types were analysed to determine the interaction between the driver, the machine, and the driving environment.

The study found similar takeover types between Super Cruise and Autopilot systems, identifying 5 primary categories: normal, braking, accelerating, evasive-manoeuvre, and right-swerve (Autopilot only).

• Normal – the most common takeover type, occurred at a highway speed without large changes in speed or steering control
• Braking – this type occurred at a similar speed as normal takeovers, but with strong deceleration (and speed decrease) and limited steering wheel rotation
• Accelerating – this takeover type occurred at a lower-than-normal speed and showed significant acceleration
• Evasive-manoeuvre – this takeover type also occurred at a lower-than-normal speed, but showed strong deceleration with significant steering rotation
• Right-swerve – this type of takeover showed a major steering wheel rotation to the right (∼60°), but did not exist for Super Cruise data*

Context analysis showed that takeovers happened mostly on highways and were largely associated with curved roads.

Braking takeovers at a normal highway speed were associated with upcoming highway exits or foreseeable low-speed situations, and both normal and braking takeovers were revealed to be based on strategic levels of decision making.

Accelerating, evasive-manoeuvre, and right-swerve takeovers were mostly caused by unwanted ADAS actions when following a slow car, such as strong braking and large steering changes.

This paper highlights the need for deeper exploration of real-world driving data and suggests that more comprehensive contexts, such as road features and lead-vehicle proximity, should be considered in future research. Additionally, the small, male-only sample in the study warrants broader demographic inclusion.

However, the findings in the study illustrate the plausibility of assessing the contextual features of takeover events for the development of context-based reference models, against which abnormal or unsafe behaviour can be compared and identified in real-time systems.

Generating such models and characterising driver response profiles are crucial steps in developing adaptive and responsive DMS and ensuring the safety of increasingly automated driving systems.

* It is hypothesised that this takeover category did not exist since Super Cruise is geofenced to highways, which limits the possibility of car swerve.

The post Takeover Context Study using Super Cruise and Autopilot appeared first on Seeing Machines.

Panellists include:

• Jude Angelo Ambrose, Head, Advanced Embedding, Seeing Machines Limited
• Naehyuck Chang, Executive Vice President, Samsung SDI America
• Sumant Paranjpe, Director of Engineering (Automotive Compute Systems), Qualcomm
• Senya Pertsel, Senior Director of Marketing, Ambarella
• Tomas Geurts, Senior Director R&D, Omnivision

Click here for more information on the panel.

The post DAC2024: In-Cabin Monitoring for Automotive Safety appeared first on Seeing Machines.

Historically, heavy vehicles have been notorious for their high crash rates. This has been directly linked to driver fatigue, with studies indicating that truck drivers falling asleep or being fatigued accounts for 46% of all driver impairment-related factors in truck-involved fatality crashes.

On top of this, working long hours is a common occurrence in the commercial vehicle sector, where drivers often face financial and other pressures to continue driving even when it’s unsafe to do so.

In light of these factors, reducing fatigue for heavy vehicle drivers has become a top priority, and there has been increased interest in real-time driver monitoring.

Real-time driver monitoring systems (DMS) can take many forms, but in general they aim to provide a solution that addresses the risks of driver distraction and fatigue as they happen.

The systems act to warn the driver when a safety-critical event such as a fatigue episode, has been detected, and depending on the device settings, parties external to the vehicle can also receive warning information.

In the study mentioned above, the authors examined the effect of real-time in-cab feedback to the driver as well as the provision of direct feedback to the driver’s employer, on the number of fatigue events detected in commercial vehicle contexts. Specifically, the study looked at the contribution of these two types of feedback on the number, timing, and duration of fatigue events.

The study found that providing a fatigue alert to a driver reduced the incidence of fatigue events by 66.2%. Adding direct feedback to the driver’s employer or fleet manager, increased this number to 94.4%.

The reduced incidence of fatigue events can be attributed to the fact that in these cases, the employer had an opportunity to use real-time, objective feedback on driver performance. The company was then able to counsel individual drivers on known risks and optimise crews and rostering.

The fact that the additional level of feedback provided greater benefits is consistent with broader safety literature. Multiple studies have shown that motivations for safe behaviour are influenced by the prevailing safety climate of the worker’s organisation, and the most effective safety cultures are those where company policies complement, rather than compete against, the demands of the working role.

The findings in the study clearly demonstrate the importance of providing feedback to the driver’s employer, as it significantly reduces the incidence of fatigue events. The findings also support the installation of a DMS and concurrent fatigue management strategies across different vehicle platforms as a preventative road safety action.

Guardian by Seeing Machines has been proven to reduce fatigue related driver events by more than 90%, by providing in-cab alerts as well as direct feedback to the driver’s manager.

As an aftermarket DMS for commercial vehicles, Guardian monitors for fatigue and distraction events and warns drivers through a set of audible and haptic alerts. The Seeing Machines Guardian Centre provides a 24/7 monitoring and analysis service that notifies managers about events, allowing them to take immediate action to manage the situation and keep their driver safe. By providing feedback to the driver’s manager, the incidence of fatigue events is significantly reduced.

Watch the video below to learn how the Guardian Centre help in managing fatigue in commercial transport operations.

The post Managing fatigue in commercial transport operations lite paper appeared first on Seeing Machines.

And if a Canberra tech company’s approach is adopted by regulators, then the simple act of detecting whether you’ve had a glass of wine at dinner then would trigger a raft of vital safety decisions by your car’s on-board computer.

These could range from the extreme – a complete lockout to driving – to ramping up all the next-generation safety systems to potentially compensate for what it “sees” – quite literally – as your level of driving impairment.

In the technology race to prevent drivers impaired by drugs and alcohol killing themselves or others on the road, Seeing Machines has vaulted ahead of the rest.

And the irony is that now Australia no longer has a domestic car-making industry, it has to depend on the regulatory courage of safety authorities in Japan, China, the US and Europe – as well as the commercial impetus and will of the car makers – to bring the life-saving technology to our shores.

There are cases where there are potentially very difficult consequences to those types of lockout systems.
John Noble

Read the full Canberra Times article to learn more about Seeing Machines’ work to develop impairment detection solutions.

The post Detecting impairment in drivers could save thousands appeared first on Seeing Machines.

In the wake of the Australian Federal Budget, it’s clear that while the government allocated more than $4 billion towards transport projects, there remains a glaring omission – a substantial investment towards driver focused technologies that are proven to enhance road safety and save the lives of more Australian road users. This is particularly concerning given the alarming statistics regarding road fatalities and high-risk driving behaviours.

Yet, we used to be world leaders in passenger safety when Victoria introduced the three-point seatbelt in 1970. So, what’s happened to mandating in-vehicle safety measures in Australia since then?

The Current State of Road Safety in Australia

In 2023, the number of deaths on Australian roads surged to 1,310¹, marking an 11.2% increase compared to the year prior. A stark rise that underscores the urgent need for more focused and effective road safety measures. Unfortunately, the current budget allocations do not adequately address this critical and ongoing issue.

Whilst the Australian Federal Budget did announce some investments relevant to road safety and infrastructure, such as $1.9 billion for road and rail projects in Western Sydney and $21 million for the creation of a national road safety data hub, which are commendable, they fall short of addressing the immediate and pressing need for advanced road safety technologies that can save lives today.

By that we mean technology being installed by car and commercial vehicle manufacturers all over the world, which reduce the risks associated with human error, largely emanating from driver distraction and fatigue.

A Call for Government Action

Read more on LinkedIn as we call on the Australian Government to invest in the adoption of technology proven to improve road safety and save lives.

¹Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics Australian Road Deaths Database (ARDD)

The post Pondering the Australian Federal Budget 3 weeks on! appeared first on Seeing Machines.