Skip to content

When2Talk: When Should a Proactive In-Car Agent Talk?

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 54 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

Investigation of how communication should adapt to event priority and passenger activity highlights event consequence, passenger activity, continuing information value, and confirmation need as key considerations for selective in-cabin communication.

Abstract

Proactive in-cabin agents can help passengers understand automated-vehicle (AV) behavior, but communicating every ride event may introduce unnecessary interruptions. We investigated how communication should adapt to event priority and passenger activity. In a mixed-methods within-subject study, 41 participants rode as passenger in a VR simulated fully-automated vehicle. We compared an event-triggered (ET) policy that communicated immediately at every event with a context-sensitive (CS) policy that selected \textit{Immediate}, \textit{Delayed}, or \textit{Silent} communications. CS increased communication appropriateness and substantially reduced perceived interruption. Perceived trust did not differ between policies, although baselines dispositional trust differentiated communication preferences. Findings highlight event consequence, passenger activity, continuing information value, and confirmation need as key considerations for selective in-cabin communication.

View source

Similar papers

Book Open access Sep 2026

Dialog with trucks - A driving simulator study exploring situationally-aware conversational agents

Current AI-based conversational agents (CAs) largely lack situational awareness, limiting their ability to understand driving context, driver state, and immediate driver needs. Consequently, the use of CA may increase drivers’ cognitive load and impair safety and user experience. This study investigates the role of sit...

Johanna Vännström, Andreas Absér, Jacob Weilandt et al. · 0 citations
Book Open access Sep 2026

The Role of Conversational Agents for Long-haul Truck Drivers: An Exploratory On-road Study

While conversational AI agents (CAs) have the potential to support drivers through hands-free and eyes-free interaction, their role in long-haul trucking remains unexplored. This paper investigates how long-haul truck drivers perceive CAs and identifies design considerations for their successful deployment. We conducte...

Johanna Vännström, Andreas Absér, Azra Habibovic et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Review Sep 2026

Foundations of Proactive Agents: Principles, Technical Layers, and Proactivity-Gym

Proactive LLM agents can turn idle compute into useful support before users ask. Yet even correct work can misread user context, impose review costs, or undermine trust. This work proposes foundations for designing, realizing, and evaluating proactive LLM agents around three joint principles (3T): Task Capability, anti...

Jio Oh, Seunghyun Do, Young-Jun Lee et al. · 0 citations
Sep 2026

A Conceptual Framework for Coordination in Human-Automated Vehicle (AV) Teaming: Structural Dimensions and Implications

Human-automated vehicle (AV) interaction can be understood as a form of teaming because safe driving often depends on coordinated contributions from both the driver and automation. Although AVs are often framed as reducing human involvement, many dynamic scenarios still require drivers and automated systems to coordina...

Jing Zang, Brandon J. Pitts · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

JarvisBench: Always-on Intelligence Between Humans and Agents

This work proposes an always-on attention-coordination layer that mediates this interface and allocates human attention across one or more working agents, and introduces JarvisBench to evaluate both directions of this coordination.

Chen Chen, Zhe-Huai Chen · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Delegating or Doing? Understanding User Behavior in Hybrid Human-Agent Interfaces

The findings suggest that the primary benefit of human--agent interfaces may be reducing interaction effort rather than improving speed, and that delegation reflects who the user is more than what the task demands.

Gavin Raine Dizon, Tyrone Justin Sta Maria, J. A. Deja et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Oct 28, 2026

Making machines that can listen

Professor Paris Smaragdis develops computers with superhuman hearing for applications like speech recognition, music understanding, and environmental monitoring.

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 6, 2026

What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us

Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity.  The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.