Towards Safe and Comfortable Vehicle Control Transitions: A Systematic Review of Takeover Time, Time Budget, and Takeover Performance
Kexin LiangSimeon C. CalvertJ. W. C. van Lint
Sep 2026
Human-computer Interaction
Abstract
Conditionally automated driving systems require human drivers to disengage from non-driving-related activities and resume vehicle control within limited time budgets when encountering scenarios beyond system capabilities. Ensuring safe and comfortable transitions is critical for reducing driving risks and improving user experience. However, takeovers involve complex human-vehicle interactions, resulting in substantial variability in drivers' responses, especially in takeover time, defined as the duration needed to regain control. This variability presents challenges in setting sufficient time budgets that are neither too short (risking safety and comfort) nor too long (reducing driver alertness and transition efficiency).
Although previous research has examined the role of time budgets in influencing takeover time and performance, few studies have systematically addressed how to determine sufficient time budgets that adapt to diverse scenarios and driver needs. This review supports such efforts by examining the entire takeover sequence, including takeover time, time budget, and takeover performance. Specifically, we (i) synthesize causal factors influencing takeover time and propose a taxonomy of its determinants using the task-capability interface model; (ii) review existing work on fixed and adaptive time budgets, introducing the concept of the takeover buffer to describe the gap between takeover time and allocated time budget; (iii) present a second taxonomy to support standardized and context-sensitive measurement of takeover performance; (iv) propose a conceptual model describing the relationships among takeover time, time budget, and performance; and (v) outline a research agenda with six directions.
This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.
P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al.· arXiv.org· 727 citations· ⚡54
The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.
M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al.· Empirical Software Engineeri...· 401 citations· ⚡48
The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.
Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al.· Information and Software Tec...· 394 citations· ⚡54
The perception of the impact of agile methods is predominantly positive, and several challenge areas were discovered, but based on this study, agile methods are here to stay.
M. Laanti, O. Salo, P. Abrahamsson· Information and Software Tec...· 260 citations· ⚡20
Related blog posts
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduOct 7, 2026
Students in MIT’s Concourse program delve deeply into the human condition, debate challenging questions, and learn to develop judgment about issues that can’t be quantified.
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.
MIT News · Artificial Intelligence· news.mit.eduSep 30, 2026
Able to defeat top-ranked human players and more efficient than other models, the new system could help decision-makers in military maneuvers or business negotiations.