Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 116 references

Simulation for All: A Step-by-Step Cookbook for Developing Human-Centered Multi-Agent Transportation Simulators

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that one open-source, modular simulation platform can host pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, automated vehicles, and public transit riders in a single shared virtual environment in real time, while collecting aligned…

desk verdict A useful, honest cookbook for a five-mode multi-agent VR transportation simulator that is one validation study short of its headline claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09367 v2 pith:FEIX2PAI submitted 2025-07-12 cs.MA

Shiva Azimi , Arash Tavakoli This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.MA
keywords transportationsimulationvirtualrealitymulti-agentsystemshuman-in-the-looproaduserbehaviorfunctionalnear-infraredspectroscopy(fNIRS)eyetrackingopen-sourceplatform
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper's central claim is that a single shared virtual-reality simulation can host all major road-user roles at once — pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, automated vehicles, and public transit riders — in real time, with each participant moving through a common urban scene and influencing the others. It offers a step-by-step cookbook of hardware choices, wiring, and open-source scripts so that a research group with comparable equipment can replicate the platform rather than buy a proprietary simulator. A sympathetic reader should care because existing simulators mostly isolate one mode at a time or rely on scripted 'other' agents, which limits how well findings about trust, yielding, and negotiation transfer to real streets. The paper also integrates brain-activity (fNIRS), eye-tracking, and wrist-sensor data into that shared scene, aiming to turn each traffic encounter into a synchronized multimodal dataset.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the modular agent-computer topology: one computing engine per road-user role, each attached to a distinct physical interface (an omnidirectional treadmill for the pedestrian, a smart trainer with elevation and wind simulation for the cyclist, an actuated cockpit with force-feedback wheel and pedals for the driver, and a walk-then-seat configuration for the transit user), all exchanging state over a low-latency UDP protocol into a single Unity scene. This per-agent computer plus UDP plus shared-scene arrangement is what turns independent hardware into one time-synchronized multiplayer environment; a second load-bearing mechanism is the human sensing stack — a headband fNIRS sensor, the VR headset's embedded eye tracker, and wrist biosensors — whose streams are software-aligned to scenario events, alongside in-VR questionnaires and an N-back task for cognitive load.

What would settle it

Run a scripted motion protocol in the pedestrian module: have the participant walk a fixed route on the omnidirectional treadmill and then stand still while the vehicle and cyclist agents follow scripted paths, all with the fNIRS headband under the VR headset. If inter-agent clock drift exceeds roughly a frame or a reaction step (tens of milliseconds) by the end of a session, or if the fNIRS channels during walking cannot be distinguished from a resting baseline after standard motion-artifact correction, the claimed real-time multimodal alignment and neural sensing capability are not supported.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core discovery claimed by the paper is that it is feasible to assemble, from commodity VR, motion, and sensing hardware, a synchronized human-in-the-loop simulation in which a pedestrian on an omnidirectional treadmill, a cyclist on a smart trainer, a driver in an actuated cockpit, and a seated public transit user all occupy the same virtual city block and respond to each other's live behavior. Each agent runs on a dedicated computer coordinated over UDP, so physical inputs such as steering angle, pedal cadence, and walking direction drive a shared Unity scene, and each participant's state is captured by fNIRS, embedded eye tracking, and wrist-based biosensors that are software-synchronized to simulation events. The paper presents three use cases — a continuous cycling-walking-transit journey, human encounters with an automated vehicle using multimodal external human-machine interfaces, and mode-specific physiological responses to traffic and infrastructure variations — as demonstrations that the platform can produce layered, time-aligned behavioral, neural, and physiological data across roles.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the off-the-shelf sensors — especially the brain-activity headband worn together with the VR headset — and the UDP network alignment stay accurate and time-synchronized while participants actually walk, pedal, and drive, since the paper reports no latency, drift, or sensor validation measurements.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A lab that follows the cookbook and uses the open scripts can run synchronized real-time experiments with multiple human participants in different road-user roles within one shared scene, without building proprietary infrastructure.
  • Researchers can study a single participant across mode transitions (cycling to walking to transit) and obtain continuous fNIRS, eye-tracking, and wrist-sensor streams aligned to each phase, which single-mode simulators cannot offer.
  • The automated vehicle module supports supervised autonomous operation with takeover controls, enabling studies of trust, supervisory attention, and takeover timing with multiple interacting human road users.
  • The equal-time-to-arrival scenario controller lets experimenters stage naturalistic negotiation moments, such as unsignalized crossings, where yielding and conflict-resolution behavior can be observed across modes.
  • Multimodal sensing combined with in-VR questionnaires makes it possible to relate physiological and neural state to behavior without breaking immersion, supporting mechanism-level accounts of road-user decisions.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the platform's synchronization holds, a natural next step is cloud-based distributed operation so that participants at different sites share one scene; the paper itself notes that network latency and drift remain unresolved, so this is conditional on future validation.
  • The same agent-computer-plus-sensing architecture could be reused beyond transportation, for example to study crowd navigation in buildings or mixed pedestrian-robot spaces, though the paper does not make that claim.
  • A testable extension would be publishing end-to-end latency, clock drift, and sensor-accuracy numbers alongside the scripts; their absence is the main reason the real-time multimodal claim currently rests on an assumption rather than a measurement.
  • The equal-time-to-arrival staging technique suggests a general method for creating controlled social encounters in VR; varying the TTA distribution could test how timing uncertainty changes yielding and conflict decisions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper describes a modular, open-source multi-agent VR simulation platform intended to study pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, automated vehicles, and public transit users in a shared virtual environment. It provides hardware specifications, system architecture, integration of fNIRS, eye tracking, and wrist-based biosensors, and presents three use cases: multimodal travel transitions, human-automated vehicle interaction, and road user well-being. The authors claim real-time synchronized multi-agent interaction as well as replicability through a 'cookbook' approach and open-source scripts.

Significance. If validated, the platform would fill a genuine gap in the literature: existing multi-agent human-in-the-loop simulators typically support only two agent types and largely exclude public transit users. The paper's strengths are its detailed hardware component list, explicit modular architecture, open-source repository, and the breadth of sensing modalities it attempts to integrate. These assets make it a potentially useful reference for other laboratories building similar systems. However, the manuscript does not provide measured evidence for the two load-bearing capabilities it advertises: real-time multi-agent synchronization and usable fNIRS signals during whole-body movement. The contribution is therefore best judged as a promising systems description rather than a demonstrated, ready-to-replicate platform.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1 (System Architecture) and Section 3.2.1] The abstract and Section 3.1 state that agents are 'synchronized using a low-latency communication protocol based on User Datagram Protocol (UDP), ensuring real-time data exchange and temporal alignment,' and Section 3.2.1 asserts that 'all sensing streams are time-synchronized with simulator events via software-level integration.' No latency, jitter, drift, or ground-truth synchronization measurements are reported anywhere in the manuscript. The only multi-agent interaction shown is the schematic in Figure 8; Figures 9-11 present single-participant traces. Because real-time synchronized multi-agent interaction is the platform's defining claimed capability, the paper should include at least one measurement of end-to-end synchronization error from a multi-agent run to substantiate it.
  2. [Section 5 (Discussion) and Figure 9C] The Discussion concedes that combined fNIRS and VR 'can pose integration difficulties' due to motion artifacts, sensor displacement, and physical interference, and states that 'achieving long-term or continuous monitoring with high spatial and temporal precision remains technically demanding.' Nevertheless, Figure 9(C) presents fNIRS traces from cycling, walking, and transit as evidence of synchronized neural monitoring. No signal-quality metrics, artifact-rejection counts, or comparisons against a reference are reported. To support the multimodal sensing capability claim, the authors should report at least one validation check (e.g., channel reliability, signal-to-noise ratio, or motion-artifact rejection rate) for the fNIRS headband during representative activities.
  3. [Abstract; Section 3.1.4; Section 4.1] The abstract claims the platform 'enables interaction across public transit users, pedestrians, cyclists, automated vehicles, and drivers.' Section 3.1.4 describes only a single user walking on an omnidirectional treadmill and sitting in a seated mode; no scenario involves a transit user simultaneously interacting with another human-controlled agent. Use Case 1 (Section 4.1) is a sequential, single-participant transition through cycling, walking, and transit, not a multi-agent transit interaction. A concrete demonstration of a transit user interacting with at least one other human-controlled agent is needed to support the 'all road users' claim.
  4. [Section 1 (Introduction) and Appendix A] The paper bills itself as a 'step-by-step cookbook' that is 'accessible to users from all technical backgrounds with minimal coding background,' but the manuscript text contains no step-by-step assembly, configuration, calibration, or scenario-authoring instructions. Appendix A provides only a hardware component table, and the actual scripts are relegated to an external OSF link [8]. Without at least one complete replication example or a summary of the key setup steps in the paper, the replicability claim cannot be evaluated from the manuscript itself.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.1.4] Section 3.1.4 contains a typo: 'V ARJO XR-4' should read 'Varjo XR-4'.
  2. [Appendix A, Table 2] Table 2 lists one fNIR2000C headband but three Empatica EmbracePlus wristbands; the text should clarify which sensors are per-agent and how simultaneous physiological recording across multiple agents is configured.
  3. [Section 5 (Discussion)] The Discussion refers to 'real users across four distinct modes,' while the Introduction and Abstract enumerate five agent types (public transit users, automated vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, drivers); please reconcile the count.
  4. [References] Reference [49] is incomplete (no year or URL), and the OSF repository link in Reference [8] would benefit from a version identifier or DOI for reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: descriptive systems/cookbook paper with no fitted predictions; self-citations are background and non-load-bearing.

full rationale

This is a descriptive systems paper, not a derivational or predictive one. It makes no quantitative predictions, fits no model parameters to data, and derives no quantitative result from equations. The scenario speeds are imported from external field studies (cyclist speed from [28]; pedestrian walking speed from [57]), so they are not fitted outputs of the platform. The synchronization and fNIRS-in-VR claims are asserted rather than measured ('synchronized using a low-latency communication protocol based on User Datagram Protocol (UDP), ensuring real-time data exchange and temporal alignment' in Section 3.1; 'All sensing streams are time-synchronized with simulator events via software-level integration' in Section 3.2.1), and Section 5 concedes that fNIRS/VR integration 'can pose integration difficulties.' These are unvalidated empirical/reproducibility concerns, not circular reasoning. The paper's self-citations ([38], [85], [102]-[104]) appear in background passages and in the cyclist-module description ('Building on the work provided in [38]...'), but they are used as prior building blocks and literature support, not to prove the central claim by definition. No 'uniqueness theorem' or equivalence is invoked, and no step reduces an output to an input by construction. Thus, under the required standard of exhibiting a specific reduction, no circular step can be identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim, that a working multi-agent platform exists as described, rests on engineering assumptions about hardware accuracy, synchronization, and sensing compatibility rather than on fitted parameters. The only hand-set numbers are example scenario speeds, which are drawn from external field measurements and do not determine the claimed capabilities.

free parameters (1)
  • Scenario speeds for the TTA-synchronized crossing = car 30 km/h; cyclist 15 km/h; pedestrian 1.5 m/s
    Hand-chosen experimental settings in the three-agent crossing scenario (Section 3.3, Figure 7), sourced from external field studies [28, 57]. They are not fitted to the paper's data and are not load-bearing for the platform capability claim.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption UDP-based local-network synchronization provides real-time temporal alignment across agent computers without clinically significant latency
    Invoked in Section 3.1 (System Architecture) as the basis for shared-environment interaction; no latency or drift measurements are reported.
  • domain assumption Combining VR headsets with fNIRS headbands, wrist sensors, and eye tracking yields usable research-grade physiological data during movement
    Assumed in Section 3.2 (Human Sensing Module) and central to the multimodal data claim; the Discussion concedes motion artifacts, sensor displacement, and physical interference remain unresolved challenges.
  • domain assumption Off-the-shelf hardware (Kat Walk VR Core 2+, Wahoo KICKR/Climb/Headwind, GTTrack cockpit, Varjo XR-4) provides accurate tracking of user actions
    Used throughout Section 3.1 and Appendix A; the paper gives model numbers but no accuracy or validation comparison against ground truth such as real walking or cycling.
  • domain assumption The Unity-based virtual city and scripted or AI agent behaviors are sufficiently realistic to produce ecologically valid interaction
    Stated in Section 3.3 and the Discussion; the authors acknowledge that AI agent behavior 'may not fully capture the complexity and variability of real-world traffic contexts'.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Simulation for All: A Step-by-Step Cookbook for Developing Human-Centered Multi-Agent Transportation Simulators." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FEIX2PAI

@misc{pith2026250709367,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Simulation for All: A Step-by-Step Cookbook for Developing Human-Centered Multi-Agent Transportation Simulators},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FEIX2PAI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09367}
}
read the original abstract

As cities evolve toward more complex and multimodal transportation systems, the need for human-centered multi-agent simulation tools has never been more urgent. Yet most existing platforms remain limited - they often separate different types of road users, rely on scripted or pre-defined behaviors, overlook public transit users as active participants, and are rarely designed with accessibility in mind for non-technical users. To address this gap, this paper presents the specifications of a multi-agent simulation platform designed to support real-time, human-centered, and immersive studies of all road users, accompanied by open-source scripts for replication. Using high-fidelity immersive virtual environments, our platform enables interaction across public transit users, pedestrians, cyclists, automated vehicles, and drivers. The architecture is modular, extensible, and designed for accessibility. The system integrates hardware-specific modules - including an omnidirectional treadmill, a seating arrangement, a smart trainer, and an actuated cockpit. Additionally, the platform collects multimodal physiological, neurological, and behavioral data through embedded sensing devices such as functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), eye tracking, and wrist-based biosensors. To show the usability of this system, we present three use cases. Simulation for All aims to lower the barrier to entry for high-fidelity transportation simulation, support experimentation across disciplines, and advance our understanding of multimodal mobility in complex urban environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.09367 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. System architecture outlining the components and connections [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Driving Module Hardware and Data Collection: 1) Logitech [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Pedestrian and Public Transit Module Hardware and Data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Cyclist Simulator Hardware and Data Collection: 1) Wahoo [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Human Sensing Module A) Modules, B) Devices, C) Data [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: In-VR questionnaire interface for collecting psychological [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Synchronized Arrival in a Three-Agent Unsignalized Crossing [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Representative Use Case: A) Shared urban intersection scenario [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Multimodal Travel Transitions: Sample Data Streams from a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Implemented Multimodal External Human-Machine Interfaces [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Sample Mode-Specific Physiological Responses to Contextual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

116 extracted references · 80 canonical work pages

  1. [8]

    Simulationforall: Open-source multi-agent transportation simulation platform

    Shiva Azimi. Simulationforall: Open-source multi-agent transportation simulation platform. https://osf.io/6sa8q/, 2025

    2025

  2. [1]

    Virtual station: Virtual reality as a bridge towards real independence in public transportation for autistic children and adolescents

    Ali Adjorlu, Christian Sonne Rosendahl, Maria Barbro Lanther, and Pawe Karman Ahmad. Virtual station: Virtual reality as a bridge towards real independence in public transportation for autistic children and adolescents. In International Conference on Design, Learning, and Innovation, pages 22–32. Springer, 2024. 42

    2024

  3. [2]

    Virtual reality as a new tool for transport data collection

    Andrea Agudelo-V´ elez, Iv´ an Sarmiento-Ordosgoitia, and Jorge C´ ordoba-Maquil´ on. Virtual reality as a new tool for transport data collection. Archives of Transport, 60(4), 2021

    2021

  4. [3]

    The effect of driving simulator fidelity on training effectiveness

    R Wade Allen, George D Park, Marcia L Cook, and Dary Fiorentino. The effect of driving simulator fidelity on training effectiveness. DSC 2007 North America , pages 1–15, 2007

    2007

  5. [4]

    Time perception during the pandemic: A longitu- dinal study examining the role of indoor and outdoor nature exposure for remote workers

    Basma Altaf, Laura SP Bloomfield, Dunia N Karzai, Nik A Sawe, Elizabeth L Murnane, Lucy Zhang Bencharit, James A Landay, and Sarah L Billington. Time perception during the pandemic: A longitu- dinal study examining the role of indoor and outdoor nature exposure for remote workers. Building and Environment , 243:110644, 2023

    2023

  6. [5]

    Demonstration of virtual re- ality simulation as a tool for understanding and evaluating pedestrian safety and perception at midblock crossings

    Austin Valentine Angulo, Erin Robartes, Xiang Guo, T Donna Chen, Arsalan Heydarian, and Brian L Smith. Demonstration of virtual re- ality simulation as a tool for understanding and evaluating pedestrian safety and perception at midblock crossings. Transportation research interdisciplinary perspectives, 20:100844, 2023

    2023

  7. [6]

    Evaluating current and future pedestrian mid-block crossing safety treatments using virtual reality simulation

    Austin Valentine Angulo, Erin Robartes, Xiang Guo, T Donna Chen, Arsalan Heydarian, and Brian L Smith. Evaluating current and future pedestrian mid-block crossing safety treatments using virtual reality simulation. Accident Analysis & Prevention , 206:107715, 2024

    2024

  8. [7]

    The ef- fects of transport mode use on self-perceived health, mental health, and social contact measures: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study

    Ione Avila-Palencia, Luc Int Panis, Evi Dons, Mailin Gaupp- Berghausen, Elisabeth Raser, Thomas G¨ otschi, Regine Gerike, Chris- tian Brand, Audrey De Nazelle, Juan Pablo Orjuela, et al. The ef- fects of transport mode use on self-perceived health, mental health, and social contact measures: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. Environment internatio...

    2018

Show all 116 references
  1. [9]

    Coupled simulator for research on the interaction between pedestrians and (automated) vehicles

    Pavlo Bazilinskyy, Lars Kooijman, Dimitra Dodou, and Joost CF de Winter. Coupled simulator for research on the interaction between pedestrians and (automated) vehicles. In Driving Simulation Confer- ence Europe. Antibes, France, 2020. 43

    2020

  2. [10]

    Driving simulator validation studies: a literature review

    Evi Blana. Driving simulator validation studies: a literature review. 1996

    1996

  3. [11]

    Leveraging wearable sensors in virtual reality driving simulators: a review of techniques and applications

    R˘ azvan Gabriel Boboc, Eugen Valentin Butil˘ a, and Silviu Butnariu. Leveraging wearable sensors in virtual reality driving simulators: a review of techniques and applications. Sensors, 24(13):4417, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Using driving simulators to assess driving safety, 2010

    Linda Ng Boyle and John D Lee. Using driving simulators to assess driving safety, 2010

    2010

  5. [13]

    Motion artifacts in functional near-infrared spectroscopy: a comparison of motion correction techniques applied to real cognitive data

    Sabrina Brigadoi, Lisa Ceccherini, Simone Cutini, Fabio Scarpa, Pietro Scatturin, Juliette Selb, Louis Gagnon, David A Boas, and Robert J Cooper. Motion artifacts in functional near-infrared spectroscopy: a comparison of motion correction techniques applied to real cognitive d...

    2014

  6. [14]

    A review of driving sim- ulation technology and applications

    Lucas Bruck, Bruce Haycock, and Ali Emadi. A review of driving sim- ulation technology and applications. IEEE Open Journal of Vehicular Technology, 2:1–16, 2020

    2020

  7. [15]

    Functional near-infrared spectroscopy

    Scott C Bunce, Meltem Izzetoglu, Kurtulus Izzetoglu, Banu Onaral, and Kambiz Pourrezaei. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy. IEEE engineering in medicine and biology magazine , 25(4):54–62, 2006

    2006

  8. [16]

    Virtual reality as a tool for design- ing accessible public transportation services

    Alisa Burova, Tero Avellan, Tuuli Keskinen, Juha Ojala, Jukka Selin, Juhani Linna, and Markku Turunen. Virtual reality as a tool for design- ing accessible public transportation services. Transportation Research Procedia, 72:2760–2767, 2023

    2023

  9. [17]

    The drives for driving simulation: a scientometric analysis and a selective review of reviews on simulated driving research

    Alessandro Oronzo Caff` o, Luigi Tinella, Antonella Lopez, Giusep- pina Spano, Ylenia Massaro, Andrea Lisi, Fabrizio Stasolla, Roberto Catanesi, Francesco Nardulli, Ignazio Grattagliano, et al. The drives for driving simulation: a scientometric analysis and a selective review ...

    2020

  10. [18]

    The iowa driving simulator: Using simulation for human performance measurement

    Sydne J Carlson-Newberry, Rebecca B Costello, et al. The iowa driving simulator: Using simulation for human performance measurement. In Emerging Technologies for Nutrition Research: Potential for Assess- ing Military Performance Capability . National Academies Press (US), 1997. 44

    1997

  11. [19]

    Driving simulators as research tools in traffic psychology

    Oliver Carsten and A Hamish Jamson. Driving simulators as research tools in traffic psychology. In Handbook of traffic psychology , pages 87–96. Elsevier, 2011

    2011

  12. [20]

    Large- scale multi-agent transportation simulations

    Nurhan Cetin, Kai Nagel, Bryan Raney, and Andreas Voellmy. Large- scale multi-agent transportation simulations. Computer Physics Com- munications, 147(1-2):559–564, 2002

    2002

  13. [21]

    Effects of physical driving experience on body movement and motion sickness among passengers in a virtual vehicle

    Chih-Hui Chang, Thomas A Stoffregen, Kuangyou B Cheng, Man Kit Lei, and Chung-Chieh Li. Effects of physical driving experience on body movement and motion sickness among passengers in a virtual vehicle. Experimental brain research, 239:491–500, 2021

    2021

  14. [22]

    Virtual reality sickness: a review of causes and measurements

    Eunhee Chang, Hyun Taek Kim, and Byounghyun Yoo. Virtual reality sickness: a review of causes and measurements. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction , 36(17):1658–1682, 2020

    2020

  15. [23]

    Ridevr: reducing sickness for in- car virtual reality by mixed-in presentation of motion flow information

    Hyung-Jun Cho and Gerard J Kim. Ridevr: reducing sickness for in- car virtual reality by mixed-in presentation of motion flow information. IEEE Access, 10:34003–34011, 2022

    2022

  16. [24]

    Design, de- velopment, and validation of driving simulators for enhancing the safety and sustainability of electric microvehicles

    Zoi Christoforou, Anastasios Kallianiotis, and Nadir Farhi. Design, de- velopment, and validation of driving simulators for enhancing the safety and sustainability of electric microvehicles. Sustainability, 17(7):3260, 2025

    2025

  17. [25]

    Cybersickness and discomfort from head-mounted displays delivering fully immersive virtual reality: A systematic review

    Samantha Cossio, Stefania Chiappinotto, Sara Dentice, Chiara Mo- real, Gaia Magro, Gaia Dussi, Alvisa Palese, and Alessandro Galazzi. Cybersickness and discomfort from head-mounted displays delivering fully immersive virtual reality: A systematic review. Nurse Education in Pra...

    2025

  18. [26]

    A virtual reality framework for human-driver interaction research: Safe and cost-effective data collection

    Luca Crosato, Chongfeng Wei, Edmond SL Ho, Hubert PH Shum, and Yuzhu Sun. A virtual reality framework for human-driver interaction research: Safe and cost-effective data collection. In Proceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interac- tion, page...

    2024

  19. [27]

    Traffic simulation: an analytical re- 45 view

    Sergey Dorokhin, Alexander Artemov, Dmitry Likhachev, Alexey Novikov, and Evgeniy Starkov. Traffic simulation: an analytical re- 45 view. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering , volume 918, page 012058. IOP Publishing, 2020

    2020

  20. [28]

    An analysis of cyclists’ speed at combined pedestrian and cycle paths

    Jenny Eriksson, ˚Asa Forsman, Anna Niska, Susanne Gustafsson, and Gunnar S¨ orensen. An analysis of cyclists’ speed at combined pedestrian and cycle paths. Traffic Injury Prevention, 20(8):828–832, 2019

    2019

  21. [29]

    Travel mode use, travel mode shift and subjective well-being: Overview of theories, empirical findings and policy implications

    Dick Ettema, Margareta Friman, Tommy G¨ arling, and Lars E Olsson. Travel mode use, travel mode shift and subjective well-being: Overview of theories, empirical findings and policy implications. Mobility, socia- bility and well-being of urban living , pages 129–150, 2016

    2016

  22. [30]

    Does another pedestrian matter? a virtual reality study on the interaction between multiple pedestrians and autonomous vehicles in shared space

    Yan Feng, Zhenlin Xu, Haneen Farah, and Bart Van Arem. Does another pedestrian matter? a virtual reality study on the interaction between multiple pedestrians and autonomous vehicles in shared space. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 2024

    2024

  23. [31]

    The iowa driving simulator: An implementation and application overview

    JS Freeman, G Watson, YE Papelis, TC Lin, A Tayyab, RA Romano, and JG Kuhl. The iowa driving simulator: An implementation and application overview. Technical report, SAE Technical Paper, 1995

    1995

  24. [32]

    Immersive traffic interactive simulator for multi-agent

    Zheng Fu, Yuhang Xu, Mengmeng Yang, Jin Huang, Diange Yang, and Zhihua Zhong. Immersive traffic interactive simulator for multi-agent. In 2024 IEEE 24th International Conference on Software Quality, Re- liability, and Security Companion (QRS-C) , pages 1004–1013. IEEE, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Trust in automated vehicles

    Zaifeng GAO, Wenmin LI, Jiawen LIANG, Hanxi PAN, Wei XU, and Mowei SHEN. Trust in automated vehicles. Advances in Psychological Science, 29(12):2172, 2021

    2021

  26. [34]

    Evaluation of electroder- mal activity during distracted driving

    Luis Gomero, Juana Perez, Seri Park, Meltem Izzetoglu, Michael Som- meling, Jobaidul Alam Boni, and Kate Hyun. Evaluation of electroder- mal activity during distracted driving. In 2022 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Human-Machine Systems (ICHMS) , pages 1–1. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  27. [35]

    Using driver monitoring to estimate readi- ness in automation: a conceptual model based on simulator experimen- tal data

    Rafael C Gon¸ calves, Courtney M Goodridge, Jonny Kuo, Mike G Lenn´ e, and Natasha Merat. Using driver monitoring to estimate readi- ness in automation: a conceptual model based on simulator experimen- tal data. Cognition, Technology & Work, pages 1–16, 2024. 46

    2024

  28. [36]

    Gaze entropy metrics for mental workload estimation are heterogenous during hands-off level 2 automation

    Courtney M Goodridge, Rafael C Goncalves, Ali Arabian, Anthony Horrobin, Albert Solernou, Yee Thung Lee, Yee Mun Lee, Ruth Madi- gan, and Natasha Merat. Gaze entropy metrics for mental workload estimation are heterogenous during hands-off level 2 automation. Ac- cident Analysi...

    2024

  29. [37]

    Physical fidelity of driving simulators

    Jeffry Allen Greenberg and Mike Blommer. Physical fidelity of driving simulators. 2011

    2011

  30. [38]

    Psycho-physiological measures on a bicycle simulator in immersive virtual environments: How pro- tected/curbside bike lanes may improve perceived safety

    Xiang Guo, Arash Tavakoli, Austin Angulo, Erin Robartes, T Donna Chen, and Arsalan Heydarian. Psycho-physiological measures on a bicycle simulator in immersive virtual environments: How pro- tected/curbside bike lanes may improve perceived safety. Transporta- tion research par...

    2023

  31. [39]

    Unveiling the impact of cognitive distraction on cyclists psycho- behavioral responses in an immersive virtual environment

    Xiang Guo, Arash Tavakoli, T Donna Chen, and Arsalan Heydar- ian. Unveiling the impact of cognitive distraction on cyclists psycho- behavioral responses in an immersive virtual environment. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems , 2024

    2024

  32. [40]

    How realis- tic a bicycle simulator can be?-a validation study

    Amira Hammami, Attila Borsos, and ´Agoston P´ al S´ andor. How realis- tic a bicycle simulator can be?-a validation study. Multimodal Trans- portation, 4(1):100193, 2025

    2025

  33. [41]

    Nasa-task load index (nasa-tlx); 20 years later

    Sandra G Hart. Nasa-task load index (nasa-tlx); 20 years later. In Pro- ceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting , volume 50, pages 904–908. Sage publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 2006

    2006

  34. [42]

    Development of nasa-tlx (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research

    Sandra G Hart and Lowell E Staveland. Development of nasa-tlx (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Advances in psychology, volume 52, pages 139–183. Elsevier, 1988

    1988

  35. [43]

    Modelling the effect of travel experiences in modal choice using virtual reality and physiological sensor data

    Basti´ an Henr ´ ıquez-Jara, Thomas O Hancock, Albert Solernou, Jorge Garcia, C Angelo Guevara, and Charisma Choudhury. Modelling the effect of travel experiences in modal choice using virtual reality and physiological sensor data. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Tech...

    2025

  36. [44]

    The bigger the better? investigating the effects of 47 driving simulator fidelity on driving behavior and perception

    Chantal Himmels, Joost Venrooij, Arben Parduzi, Martin Peller, and Andreas Riener. The bigger the better? investigating the effects of 47 driving simulator fidelity on driving behavior and perception. Trans- portation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour , 101:250...

    2024

  37. [45]

    Brain–behavior relationships of trust in shared space human–robot collaboration

    Sarah K Hopko, Yinsu Zhang, Aakash Yadav, Prabhakar R Pagilla, and Ranjana K Mehta. Brain–behavior relationships of trust in shared space human–robot collaboration. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 13(1):1–23, 2024

    2024

  38. [46]

    An overview of agent-based models for trans- port simulation and analysis

    Jiangyan Huang, Youkai Cui, Lele Zhang, Weiping Tong, Yunyang Shi, and Zhiyuan Liu. An overview of agent-based models for trans- port simulation and analysis. Journal of Advanced Transportation , 2022(1):1252534, 2022

    2022

  39. [47]

    Sky-drive: A distributed multi-agent simulation platform for socially- aware and human-ai collaborative future transportation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.18010, 2025

    Zilin Huang, Zihao Sheng, Zhengyang Wan, Yansong Qu, Yuhao Luo, Boyue Wang, Pei Li, Yen-Jung Chen, Jiancong Chen, Keke Long, et al. Sky-drive: A distributed multi-agent simulation platform for socially- aware and human-ai collaborative future transportation.arXiv preprint arXi...

    2025 arXiv

  40. [48]

    External communication of automated vehicles in mixed traffic: Addressing the right human interaction partner in multi-agent simulation

    Maximilian H¨ ubner, Alexander Feierle, Michael Rettenmaier, and Klaus Bengler. External communication of automated vehicles in mixed traffic: Addressing the right human interaction partner in multi-agent simulation. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and be- h...

    2022

  41. [49]

    Human-centered cities lab, n.d

    Human-Centered Cities Lab. Human-centered cities lab, n.d

  42. [50]

    Development and evaluation of a virtual reality driving simulator

    Quinate Chioma Ihemedu-Steinke, Demet Sirim, Rainer Erbach, Prashanth Halady, and Gerrit Meixner. Development and evaluation of a virtual reality driving simulator. In Mensch und Computer 2015– Workshopband, pages 491–500. De Gruyter Oldenbourg, 2015

    2015

  43. [51]

    Short-term effects of medi- tation on sustained attention as measured by fnirs

    Meltem Izzetoglu, Patricia A Shewokis, Kathryn Tsai, Phillip Dantoin, Kathryn Sparango, and Katherine Min. Short-term effects of medi- tation on sustained attention as measured by fnirs. Brain sciences , 10(9):608, 2020

    2020

  44. [52]

    The concurrent validity of the n-back task as a working memory measure

    Susanne M Jaeggi, Martin Buschkuehl, Walter J Perrig, and Beat Meier. The concurrent validity of the n-back task as a working memory measure. Memory, 18(4):394–412, 2010. 48

    2010

  45. [53]

    Testing the validity of multi participant dis- tributed simulation for understanding and modeling road user interac- tion

    Amir Hossein Kalantari, Yi-Shin Lin, Ali Mohammadi, Natasha Merat, and Gustav Markkula. Testing the validity of multi participant dis- tributed simulation for understanding and modeling road user interac- tion. 2023

    2023

  46. [54]

    Three studies supporting the initial validation of the stress numerical rating scale-11 (stress nrs- 11): A single item measure of momentary stress for adolescents and adults

    Dina Karvounides, Pippa M Simpson, W Hobart Davies, Kim A Khan, Steven J Weisman, and Keri R Hainsworth. Three studies supporting the initial validation of the stress numerical rating scale-11 (stress nrs- 11): A single item measure of momentary stress for adolescents and adul...

    2016

  47. [55]

    Multi-modal dis- tributed simulation combining cars, bicyclists, and pedestrians

    Joseph K Kearney, David A Noyce, Kelvin R Santiago-Chaparro, Soumyajit Chakraborty, Yuanyuan Jiang, et al. Multi-modal dis- tributed simulation combining cars, bicyclists, and pedestrians. 2018

    2018

  48. [56]

    Development of a drive-in driver-in-the-loop fully immersive driving simulator for virtual validation of automotive systems

    Siddartha Khastgir, Stewart Birrell, Gunwant Dhadyalla, and Paul Jennings. Development of a drive-in driver-in-the-loop fully immersive driving simulator for virtual validation of automotive systems. In 2015 IEEE 81st Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), pages 1–4. IEEE, 2015

    2015

  49. [57]

    Field studies of pedestrian walking speed and start-up time

    Richard L Knoblauch, Martin T Pietrucha, and Michael Nitzburg. Field studies of pedestrian walking speed and start-up time. Trans- portation Research Record, 1538:27–38, 1996

    1996

  50. [58]

    A review of traffic simulation software

    Gligor Kotusevski and Ken A Hawick. A review of traffic simulation software. 2009

    2009

  51. [59]

    Traffic simulation with sumo–simulation of urban mobility

    Daniel Krajzewicz. Traffic simulation with sumo–simulation of urban mobility. Fundamentals of traffic simulation , pages 269–293, 2010

    2010

  52. [60]

    Virtual reality as an empirical research tool—exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model

    Saskia F Kuliga, Tyler Thrash, Ruth Conroy Dalton, and Christoph H¨ olscher. Virtual reality as an empirical research tool—exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model. Com- puters, environment and urban systems , 54:363–375, 2015

    2015

  53. [61]

    Investigating the dynamics of collective behavior among pedestrians crossing roads: a multi-user virtual reality approach

    Jae-Hong Kwon, Jinho Won, and Gi-Hyoug Cho. Investigating the dynamics of collective behavior among pedestrians crossing roads: a multi-user virtual reality approach. Accident Analysis & Prevention , 199:107477, 2024. 49

    2024

  54. [62]

    Urban interaction–getting vul- nerable road users into driving simulation

    Christian Lehsing and Ilja T Feldstein. Urban interaction–getting vul- nerable road users into driving simulation. In UR: BAN Human Fac- tors in Traffic: Approaches for Safe, Efficient and Stress-Free Urban Traffic, pages 347–362. Springer, 2017

    2017

  55. [63]

    A coupled driving simulator to investigate the interaction between bicy- cles and automated vehicles

    Johannes Lindner, Andreas Keler, Georgios Grigoropoulos, Patrick Malcolm, Florian Denk, Pascal Brunner, and Klaus Bogenberger. A coupled driving simulator to investigate the interaction between bicy- cles and automated vehicles. In 2022 IEEE 25th International Confer- ence on ...

    2022

  56. [64]

    A distributed simulation study to investigate pedestrians’ road- crossing decisions and head movements in response to different vehicle kinematics in mixed traffic

    Wei Lyu, Yee Mun Lee, Chinebuli Uzondu, Ruth Madigan, Rafael C Goncalves, Jorge Garcia de Pedro, Richard Romano, and Natasha Merat. A distributed simulation study to investigate pedestrians’ road- crossing decisions and head movements in response to different vehicle kinematic...

    2024

  57. [65]

    Training the elderly in pedestrian safety: Transfer effect be- tween two virtual reality simulation devices

    Pauline Maillot, Aur´ elie Dommes, Nguyen-Thong Dang, and Fabrice Vienne. Training the elderly in pedestrian safety: Transfer effect be- tween two virtual reality simulation devices. Accident Analysis & Pre- vention, 99:161–170, 2017

    2017

  58. [66]

    Analysis of individual driving experience in autonomous and human-driven vehicles using a driving simulator

    Udara Manawadu, Masaaki Ishikawa, Mitsuhiro Kamezaki, and Shigeki Sugano. Analysis of individual driving experience in autonomous and human-driven vehicles using a driving simulator. In 2015 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM) , pages 299...

    2015

  59. [67]

    Neural underpin- nings of fine motor skills under stress and anxiety: A review.Physiology & Behavior , page 114593, 2024

    Lucas Athaydes Martins, Aniuska Schiavo, Lisiˆ e Val´ eria Paz, L´ eder Leal Xavier, and R´ egis Gemerasca Mestriner. Neural underpin- nings of fine motor skills under stress and anxiety: A review.Physiology & Behavior , page 114593, 2024

    2024

  60. [68]

    What does it mean to cycle in virtual reality? exploring cycling fidelity and control of vr bicycle simulators

    Andrii Matviienko, Hajris Hoxha, and Max M¨ uhlh¨ auser. What does it mean to cycle in virtual reality? exploring cycling fidelity and control of vr bicycle simulators. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , pages 1–15, 2023. 50

    2023

  61. [69]

    Measures of emotion: A review

    Iris B Mauss and Michael D Robinson. Measures of emotion: A review. Cognition and emotion , 23(2):209–237, 2009

    2009

  62. [70]

    Examining pedestrian-autonomous vehicle interactions in virtual real- ity

    Natasha Merat, Patrick Dickenson, Fanta Camara, and Charles Fox. Examining pedestrian-autonomous vehicle interactions in virtual real- ity

  63. [71]

    A validation study of driving errors using a driving simulator

    Lynn Meuleners and Michelle Fraser. A validation study of driving errors using a driving simulator. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour , 29:14–21, 2015

    2015

  64. [72]

    A flexible multi-modal multi-user traffic simulation for studying complex road design

    Jack Miller, Vijay Kalivarapu, Michael Holm, Tor Finseth, Jordan Williams, and Eliot Winer. A flexible multi-modal multi-user traffic simulation for studying complex road design. In International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Enginee...

    2020

  65. [73]

    Fantastic city generator

    MOBIUS Games. Fantastic city generator. https: //assetstore.unity.com/packages/3d/environments/urban/ fantastic-city-generator-157625 , 2024. Unity Asset Store

    2024

  66. [74]

    Study- ing bicyclists’ perceived level of safety using a bicycle simulator com- bined with immersive virtual reality

    Mohsen Nazemi, Michael AB van Eggermond, Alexander Erath, Dorothea Schaffner, Michael Joos, and Kay W Axhausen. Study- ing bicyclists’ perceived level of safety using a bicycle simulator com- bined with immersive virtual reality. Accident Analysis & Prevention , 151:105943, 2021

    2021

  67. [75]

    Monitoring brain activity in vr: Eeg and neuroimaging

    Sebastian Ocklenburg and Jutta Peterburs. Monitoring brain activity in vr: Eeg and neuroimaging. In Virtual Reality in Behavioral Neuro- science: New Insights and Methods , pages 47–71. Springer, 2023

    2023

  68. [76]

    Assessment of driv- ing simulator studies on driver distraction

    P Papantoniou, E Papadimitriou, and G Yannis. Assessment of driv- ing simulator studies on driver distraction. Advances in transportation studies, (35), 2015

    2015

  69. [77]

    Ar- ped: A framework of augmented reality enabled pedestrian-in-the-loop simulation

    Daniel Perez, Mahmud Hasan, Yuzhong Shen, and Hong Yang. Ar- ped: A framework of augmented reality enabled pedestrian-in-the-loop simulation. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory , 94:237–249, 2019. 51

    2019

  70. [78]

    Virtual versus reality: A systematic review of real-world built environment tasks performed in caves and a framework for performance and experi- ence evaluation

    Alexander C Pogmore, Richard J Davies, and Neil J Cooke. Virtual versus reality: A systematic review of real-world built environment tasks performed in caves and a framework for performance and experi- ence evaluation. In Virtual Worlds , volume 3, pages 536–571. MDPI, 2024

    2024

  71. [79]

    PTV VISSIM 2023 – User Manual

    PTV Group. PTV VISSIM 2023 – User Manual . PTV Planung Transport Verkehr GmbH, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2023. https://www. ptvgroup.com/en/solutions/products/ptv-vissim/

    2023

  72. [80]

    Vr bus training for autistic children: Building independence in public transit

    Freya Gade Ravnsborg, Nickolai Frederik Schouborg Jensen, and Ali Adjorlu. Vr bus training for autistic children: Building independence in public transit. In 2025 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VR W) , pages 211–214. IEEE, 2025

    2025

  73. [81]

    Using virtual reality to assess user experience

    Francisco Rebelo, Paulo Noriega, Em ´ ılia Duarte, and Marcelo Soares. Using virtual reality to assess user experience. Human factors , 54(6):964–982, 2012

    2012

  74. [82]

    Assessment of simulator fidelity and validity in sim- ulator and on-the-road studies

    Andreas Riener. Assessment of simulator fidelity and validity in sim- ulator and on-the-road studies. International Journal on Advances in Systems and Measurements , 3(3), 2010

    2010

  75. [83]

    Level of pedestrian stress in urban streetscapes

    Alvaro Rodriguez-Valencia, Hernan Alberto Ortiz-Ramirez, Willis Simancas, and Jose Agustin Vallejo-Borda. Level of pedestrian stress in urban streetscapes. Transportation research record, 2676(6):87–98, 2022

    2022

  76. [84]

    Driving simulator configu- ration impacts drivers’ behavior and control performance: An example with studies of a rural intersection

    Florence Rosey and Jean-Michel Auberlet. Driving simulator configu- ration impacts drivers’ behavior and control performance: An example with studies of a rural intersection. Transportation research part F: traffic psychology and behaviour , 27:99–111, 2014

    2014

  77. [85]

    Mad-ive: Multi-agent distributed immersive virtual environ- ments for vulnerable road user research—potential, challenges, and re- quirements

    Sepehr Sabeti, Arash Tavakoli, Arsalan Heydarian, and Omidreza Shoghli. Mad-ive: Multi-agent distributed immersive virtual environ- ments for vulnerable road user research—potential, challenges, and re- quirements. In Computing in Civil Engineering 2023 , pages 1113–1120. 2023. 52

    2023

  78. [86]

    Affective experience in a virtual crowd regulates perceived travel time

    Saeedeh Sadeghi, Ricardo Daziano, So-Yeon Yoon, and Adam K An- derson. Affective experience in a virtual crowd regulates perceived travel time. Virtual Reality, 27(2):1051–1061, 2023

    2023

  79. [87]

    The influence of in-vr questionnaire design on the user experience

    Saeed Safikhani, Michael Holly, Alexander Kainz, and Johanna Pirker. The influence of in-vr questionnaire design on the user experience. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, pages 1–8, 2021

    2021

  80. [88]

    Perceived stress scale, 1983

    Perceived Stress Scale. Perceived stress scale, 1983

    1983

  81. [89]

    Virtually the same? analysing pedestrian behaviour by means of virtual reality

    Sonja Schneider and Klaus Bengler. Virtually the same? analysing pedestrian behaviour by means of virtual reality. Transportation re- search part F: traffic psychology and behaviour , 68:231–256, 2020

    2020

  82. [90]

    A real bicycle simulator in a virtual real- ity environment: the fivis project

    Oliver Schulzyk, Ulrich Hartmann, Jens Bongartz, Tobias Bildhauer, and Rainer Herpers. A real bicycle simulator in a virtual real- ity environment: the fivis project. In 4th European Conference of the International Federation for Medical and Biological Engineering: ECIFMBE 200...

    2008

  83. [91]

    Gaze entropy measures detect alcohol-induced driver impairment

    Brook A Shiferaw, David P Crewther, and Luke A Downey. Gaze entropy measures detect alcohol-induced driver impairment. Drug and alcohol dependence, 204:107519, 2019

    2019

  84. [92]

    Public transportation, heavy rail train- ing simulator

    ForgeFX Simulations. Public transportation, heavy rail train- ing simulator. https://forgefx.com/simulation-projects/ public-transportation-heavy-rail-training-simulator/ , n.d. Accessed: 2025-04-30

    2025

  85. [93]

    Walking (and cycling) to well-being: Modal and other determinants of subjective well-being during the commute.Travel behaviour and society , 16:249–261, 2019

    Patrick A Singleton. Walking (and cycling) to well-being: Modal and other determinants of subjective well-being during the commute.Travel behaviour and society , 16:249–261, 2019

    2019

  86. [94]

    Transims: Trans- portation analysis and simulation system

    Laron Smith, Richard Beckman, and Keith Baggerly. Transims: Trans- portation analysis and simulation system. Technical report, Los Alamos National Lab.(LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States), 1995. 53

    1995

  87. [95]

    Motion sickness and human performance–exploring the impact of driv- ing simulator user trials

    Joseph Smyth, Stewart Birrell, Alex Mouzakitis, and Paul Jennings. Motion sickness and human performance–exploring the impact of driv- ing simulator user trials. In Advances in Human Aspects of Trans- portation: Proceedings of the AHFE 2018 International Conference on Human Fa...

    2018

  88. [96]

    Exploring the origins of eeg motion artefacts during simultaneous fmri acquisition: Implications for motion artefact correction

    Glyn S Spencer, James A Smith, Muhammad EH Chowdhury, Richard Bowtell, and Karen J Mullinger. Exploring the origins of eeg motion artefacts during simultaneous fmri acquisition: Implications for motion artefact correction. NeuroImage, 173:188–198, 2018

    2018

  89. [97]

    Effects of decades of physical driving on body movement and motion sickness during virtual driving

    Thomas A Stoffregen, Chih-Hui Chang, Fu-Chen Chen, and Wei-Jhong Zeng. Effects of decades of physical driving on body movement and motion sickness during virtual driving. PLoS One , 12(11):e0187120, 2017

    2017

  90. [98]

    Design and construction of a virtual bicycle simulator for evaluating sustainable facilities design

    Carlos Sun and Zhu Qing. Design and construction of a virtual bicycle simulator for evaluating sustainable facilities design. Advances in Civil Engineering, 2018(1):5735820, 2018

    2018

  91. [99]

    Immersive insights: evaluating augmented reality interfaces for pedestrians in a cave-based experiment

    Wilbert Tabone, Riender Happee, Yue Yang, Ehsan Sadraei, Jorge Garc ´ ıa de Pedro, Yee Mun Lee, Natasha Merat, and Joost de Win- ter. Immersive insights: evaluating augmented reality interfaces for pedestrians in a cave-based experiment. Frontiers in Virtual Reality , 5:1353941, 2024

    2024

  92. [100]

    Vir- tual reality driving simulation for measuring driver behavior and char- acteristics

    Seyyed Meisam Taheri, Kojiro Matsushita, Minoru Sasaki, et al. Vir- tual reality driving simulation for measuring driver behavior and char- acteristics. Journal of transportation technologies , 7(02):123, 2017

    2017

  93. [101]

    Validation of a moving base driving simulator for motion sickness research

    Tessa MW Talsma, Omar Hassanain, Riender Happee, and Ksander N de Winkel. Validation of a moving base driving simulator for motion sickness research. Applied ergonomics, 106:103897, 2023

    2023

  94. [102]

    Driver state modeling through latent variable state space framework in the wild

    Arash Tavakoli, Steven Boker, and Arsalan Heydarian. Driver state modeling through latent variable state space framework in the wild. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 24(2):1879– 1893, 2022. 54

    2022

  95. [103]

    Leverag- ing ubiquitous computing for empathetic routing: A naturalistic data- driven approach

    Arash Tavakoli, Mehdi Boukhechba, and Arsalan Heydarian. Leverag- ing ubiquitous computing for empathetic routing: A naturalistic data- driven approach. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems , pages 1–6, 2021

    2021

  96. [104]

    Multimodal driver state mod- eling through unsupervised learning

    Arash Tavakoli and Arsalan Heydarian. Multimodal driver state mod- eling through unsupervised learning. Accident Analysis & Prevention , 170:106640, 2022

    2022

  97. [105]

    Evaluating autonomous vehicle external communication using a multi-pedestrian vr simulator

    Tram Thi Minh Tran, Callum Parker, Xinyan Yu, Debargha Dey, Marieke Martens, Pavlo Bazilinskyy, and Martin Tomitsch. Evaluating autonomous vehicle external communication using a multi-pedestrian vr simulator. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquito...

    2024

  98. [106]

    Social decision- making and the brain: A comparative perspective

    S´ ebastien Tremblay, KM Sharika, and Michael L Platt. Social decision- making and the brain: A comparative perspective. Trends in cognitive sciences, 21(4):265–276, 2017

    2017

  99. [107]

    Bikevr: a virtual reality bicycle simulator towards sustainable urban space and traffic planning

    Daniela Ullmann, Julian Kreimeier, Timo G¨ otzelmann, and Harald Kipke. Bikevr: a virtual reality bicycle simulator towards sustainable urban space and traffic planning. In Proceedings of Mensch und Com- puter 2020 , pages 511–514. 2020

    2020

  100. [108]

    Trust in automated vehicles: constructs, psychological processes, and assessment

    Francesco Walker, Yannick Forster, Sebastian Hergeth, Johannes Kraus, William Payre, Philipp Wintersberger, and Marieke Martens. Trust in automated vehicles: constructs, psychological processes, and assessment. Frontiers in Psychology, 14:1279271, 2023

    2023

  101. [109]

    Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the panas scales

    David Watson, Lee Anna Clark, and Auke Tellegen. Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the panas scales. Journal of personality and social psychology , 54(6):1063, 1988

    1988

  102. [110]

    Development and evaluation of a motion-based vr bicycle simulator

    Philipp Wintersberger, Andrii Matviienko, Andreas Schweidler, and Florian Michahelles. Development and evaluation of a motion-based vr bicycle simulator. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 6(MHCI):1–19, 2022

    2022

  103. [111]

    Systematic review of driving simulator validation studies

    Rachael A Wynne, Vanessa Beanland, and Paul M Salmon. Systematic review of driving simulator validation studies. Safety science, 117:138– 151, 2019. 55

    2019

  104. [112]

    Using distributed simulations to investigate driver-pedestrian interactions and kinematic cues: Implications for automated vehicle behaviour and communica- tion

    Yue Yang, Yee Mun Lee, Amir Hossein Kalantari, Jorge Garcia de Pe- dro, Anthony Horrobin, Michael Daly, Albert Solernou, Christopher Holmes, Gustav Markkula, and Natasha Merat. Using distributed simulations to investigate driver-pedestrian interactions and kinematic cues: Impl...

    2024

  105. [113]

    Driver distraction and its effects on partially au- tomated driving performance: A driving simulator study among young- experienced drivers

    Noa Zangi, Rawan Srour-Zreik, Dana Ridel, Hadas Chassidim, and Avinoam Borowsky. Driver distraction and its effects on partially au- tomated driving performance: A driving simulator study among young- experienced drivers. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 166:106565, 2022

    2022

  106. [114]

    Expectations and trust in automated vehicles

    Qiaoning Zhang, X Jessie Yang, and Lionel Peter Robert. Expectations and trust in automated vehicles. In Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–9, 2020

    2020

  107. [115]

    Car-following behavior of human-driven vehicles in mixed-flow traffic: A driving simulator study

    Anye Zhou, Yongyang Liu, Einat Tenenboim, Shubham Agrawal, and Srinivas Peeta. Car-following behavior of human-driven vehicles in mixed-flow traffic: A driving simulator study. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Vehicles, 8(4):2661–2673, 2023

    2023

  108. [116]

    Influences of weather on pedestrian safety perception at mid-block crossing: A cave-based study

    Manman Zhu, Daniel J Graham, Nan Zhang, Zijin Wang, and NN Sze. Influences of weather on pedestrian safety perception at mid-block crossing: A cave-based study. Accident Analysis & Prevention , 215:107988, 2025. A Hardware Components List of hardware components used to build t...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.