Dialog system for warning and information systems

• US 20030117291A1
• Filed: 12/13/2002
• Published: 06/26/2003
• Est. Priority Date: 12/13/2001
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Bayerische Motoren Werke AG
• Original Assignee: Daimler AG (Mercedes-Benz Group AG)
• Inventors: Dobler, Gunter, Hess, Markus, Kincses, Wilhelm, Rothe, Siegfried
• Granted Patent: US 7,239,239 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 340/691.1
• CPC Class Codes: B60Q 1/503 using luminous text or symbol displays in or on the vehicle, e.g. static text

Abstract

In order to make warning devices more efficient, it is known to design parameters to be variable and therewith to be adaptable depending upon the state or condition of a user of the warning information. Herein, for example, warning start points are changed or multi-stage warnings are engineered depending upon urgency. The disadvantage of such an adaptive system can however reside therein, that the mechanistic detection of the condition of the operator using various sensor systems and the subsequent output to the operator or the operator assistant system is not always acceptable, which can irritate the vehicle operator or occupants. In order to increase the acceptance by the user of the warning information it is proposed that in the lead-up to a planned change in the mode and manner of the output of the warning information, communication is initiated with at least one of the users. In the framework of this communication a user can indicate his acceptance or declining with respect to the planned change.

Claims

1. Process for controlling a warning system, which is dynamically adaptable, in the mode and manner of output of warning information, to the behavior of one or more users of this information or to the situation prevailing in the environment of the system, thereby characterized, that preliminary to a planned change in the mode and manner of this output of warning information, the system initiates communication with at least one of the users of the information, in the framework of which this user indicates acceptance or declining of the planned change.

2. Process according to claim 1, thereby characterized, that a change in the mode and manner of the output of the warning information occurs when, in the framework of the communication, an acceptance thereto is indicated.

3. Process according to one of claims 1 or 2, thereby characterized, that in the case that, following expiration of a predetermined time span, neither an acceptance nor a declining of the planned change had occurred, the system carries out this planned change in the mode or manner of the warning information.

4. Process according to one of claims 1 through 3, thereby characterized, that a change in the mode and manner of the output warning information does not occur when, in the framework of the communication, a declining thereof is indicated.

5. Process according to claim 4, thereby characterized, that the declining by at least one of the users is ignored when the warning system has recognized that a significantly stronger change in the mode and manner of the output of the warning information is necessary, or that the user has averted his eyes from the display unit.

6. Process according to claim 5, thereby characterized, that the change in the mode and manner of the output warning information which is actually carried out is less of a change than initially planned.

7. Process according to claim 1, thereby characterized, that in the case that the warning system recognizes the need for a significantly stronger change in the mode and manner of the output of the warning information, the acceptance to the change is presumed to have been given by at least one of the users, and as a consequence thereof, carries out the planned change.

8. Process according to one of claims 3, 5, 6 or 7, thereby characterized, that the user is made aware of the change in the mode and manner of the output warning information.

9. Process according to one of claims 1 through 8, thereby characterized, that the communication involves at least one speech dialog system.

10. Process according to one of claims 1 through 9, thereby characterized, that the communication involves an optical signal means and/or a graphic display unit.

16. Use of a process or a device according to one of the preceding claims in a motor vehicle.

17. Use of a process or a device according to one of the preceding claims in a control station for monitoring a power plant or rail system.

11. Device for controlling the warning system, which includes a unit for output of warning information and a unit for adaptation of the mode and manner of the output warning information depending upon the behavior of one or more users of this information or depending on the situation prevailing in the environment of the system, thereby characterized, that the device includes a device for communication with at least one of the users of the warning information, via which this user can express his acceptance or his declining of a planned change in the mode and manner of the output of the warning information.

12. Device according to claim 11, thereby characterized, that the communication unit includes a speech dialog system.

13. Device according to one of claims 11 or 12, thereby characterized, that the communication means includes an optical signal means and/or a graphic display unit.

14. Device according to one of claims 11 through 13, thereby characterized, that the communication unit involves haptic, olfactory and/or acoustic communication means.

15. Device according to one of claims 11 through 14, thereby characterized, that the warning system further includes a means for detecting the direction of view of at least one of the users.