Should Benevolent Deception be Allowed in EHMI? A Mechanism Explanation Based on Game Theory

The application of external human-machine interface (EHMI) on autonomous vehicles (AVs) facilitates information exchange. Existing research fails to consider the impact of the sequence of actions, as well as the effects of EHMI applications and deception, raising the question of whether benevolent, well-intentioned deception should be permitted (i.e., misleading statements that are intended to benefit both parties). We established a game theory based EHMI information disclosure framework for AVs in this study. In considering benevolent deception, this framework divided the decision-making process into three stages, respectively encompassing three key questions: whether to disclose, when to disclose, and what type of intention information to disclose. The results show that theoretical advantages of deception exist in certain cases when AV expects to maximize the safety of the interaction. In 40 out of 484 cases (8.3%), safety can be enhanced through successful deception. Those successful deceptions fall into two categories: 1) In 28 of these cases, the straight-going AV expected the left-turning human-driven vehicle (HV) to yield, while HV exhibited lower speed and higher acceleration; 2) In 12 of these cases, AV expected HV to proceed first, while HV exhibited higher speed and lower acceleration. We also conducted a VR-based driving simulation experiment, and the results confirmed our conclusion. Additionally, we found that when participants had low trust in the EHMI, its use negatively impacted interaction efficiency instead. This study serves as an exploratory behavioral mechanism study based on specific hypotheses for future EHMI design and ethical decision-making of autonomous driving system.

Publication Details

Journal
arXiv (Cornell University)
Published
2025-04-20
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Should Benevolent Deception be Allowed in EHMI? A Mechanism Explanation Based on Game Theory

arXiv (Cornell University)
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
article

Should Benevolent Deception be Allowed in EHMI? A Mechanism Explanation Based on Game Theory

article en

Abstract

The application of external human-machine interface (EHMI) on autonomous vehicles (AVs) facilitates information exchange. Existing research fails to consider the impact of the sequence of actions, as well as the effects of EHMI applications and deception, raising the question of whether benevolent, well-intentioned deception should be permitted (i.e., misleading statements that are intended to benefit both parties). We established a game theory based EHMI information disclosure framework for AVs in this study. In considering benevolent deception, this framework divided the decision-making process into three stages, respectively encompassing three key questions: whether to disclose, when to disclose, and what type of intention information to disclose. The results show that theoretical advantages of deception exist in certain cases when AV expects to maximize the safety of the interaction. In 40 out of 484 cases (8.3%), safety can be enhanced through successful deception. Those successful deceptions fall into two categories: 1) In 28 of these cases, the straight-going AV expected the left-turning human-driven vehicle (HV) to yield, while HV exhibited lower speed and higher acceleration; 2) In 12 of these cases, AV expected HV to proceed first, while HV exhibited higher speed and lower acceleration. We also conducted a VR-based driving simulation experiment, and the results confirmed our conclusion. Additionally, we found that when participants had low trust in the EHMI, its use negatively impacted interaction efficiency instead. This study serves as an exploratory behavioral mechanism study based on specific hypotheses for future EHMI design and ethical decision-making of autonomous driving system.

arXiv (Cornell University)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 44%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Should Benevolent Deception be Allowed in EHMI? A Mechanism Explanation Based on Game Theory · arXiv (Cornell University) (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS