This thesis presents significant advancements in the field of driver’s chest localization and breathing detection using FMCW radar. It introduces a neural network model for predicting the 3D location of the driver’s chest and a novel algorithm for detecting breathing patterns and localizing the chest position. These scientific breakthroughs contribute to the development of an adaptive safety system for level 3 and above autonomous driving within the IFAS project (FKZ 19A19009E).

Cette recherche étudie la perception de la qualité de vie (QV) et de la qualité de l'environnement intérieur (QEI) du point de vue des occupants d’espaces de travail certifiés « durables » selon le système d'énergie et de conception environnementale (LEED) et des occupants des immeubles de bureaux conventionnels. Dans cette étude, la QV est définie en termes de santé perçue, confort, et productivité. La qualité des environnements intérieurs est importante, car les gens passent la majorité de leur vie à l'intérieur des immeubles et, dans notre société contemporaine, plus de ce temps est passé dans des espaces de travail, tels que les espaces de bureaux. Les préoccupations grandissantes pour la durabilité des espaces de vie et la prise de conscience des effets négatifs que des bâtiments peuvent avoir sur les occupants font émerger les constructions dites ‘vertes’ comme étant des alternatives plus durables. LEED est le système d’accréditation le plus populaire de nos jours en Amérique du Nord qui évalue les bâtiments verts en terme de leur performance environnementale. Toutefois, la revue de littérature indique que des occupants des édifices de bureaux certifiés LEED ne sont pas toujours satisfaits avec la QEI. Les bâtiments certifiés LEED sont en effet uniquement évalués selon des critères techniques de performance. Pourtant, il y peut avoir des écarts entre les performances mesurées et celles perçues par les occupants. Cela soulève la question suivante: à quel point les bâtiments construits selon les critères LEED prennent-ils en compte la qualité de vie (QoL) et les facteurs humains dans l’évaluation des espaces de travail ? Cette recherche a donc pour but de proposer un nouveau cadre qui prend en considération non seulement des facteurs durables, mais aussi humains pour évaluer les environnements de travail. Cette recherche utilise une approche mixte – quantitative et qualitative – en trois phases afin d’étudier de manière approfondie la perception de la qualité de vie des occupants de deux bâtiments certifiés LEED et d’un immeuble de bureaux conventionnel. La phase I est dédiée à l’observation des environnements de travail et la documentation des traces d’interaction entre l’utilisateur et l’espace. La phase II est dédiée aux entrevues permettant aux participants de décrire leur expérience de la QV et les facteurs de la QEI qui façonnent leur expérience. Ils nous aident aussi à identifier les éléments constitutifs d'un environnement humain de travail. Parallèlement, des questionnaires aident à comprendre la relation entre la qualité de vie perçue par les occupants et les facteurs de QEI dérivés de la littérature. À l’aide de groupes de discussion, menés lors de la phase III, nous cherchons à valider les résultats préliminaires. Les données sont ensuite analysées séparément en utilisant la ‘triangulation’ afin d’interpréter et corroborer les résultats. Cette étude compare les expériences des espaces de travail « verts » et « conventionnels » et révèle 32 facteurs (30 facteurs QEI et deux autres) qui peuvent affecter de manière significative l'expérience des édifices de bureaux. De plus, des éléments constitutifs d'un environnement de travail humain du point de vue des occupants ont été identifiés. Ceux-ci nous permettent donc de mettre au point un nouveau cadre global, intégrant des critères humains pour évaluer la QEI dans des environnements de travail durables. Ce cadre met en relation la QEI des environnements de travail et la QV des occupants en tant que système environnement-comportement. / This research studies perceived Quality of Life (QoL) and Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) of occupants’ in the work environments of sustainable office buildings certified under the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) system (green buildings) and in conventional office buildings. QoL is defined in this research in terms of perceived health, comfort, and productivity. The quality of indoor environments is important because people spend most of their time inside buildings, and in contemporary society, much of the time spent in work environments is in office buildings. In this era of growing concerns about sustainability and the increased awareness of buildings’ negative impacts on occupants, green buildings have been promoted as sustainable solutions to these issues. LEED is the most popular rating system for measuring the performance of green buildings in North America. However, the literature review indicates that there are user complaints about the IEQ of LEED-certified office buildings. LEED-certified buildings are assessed based on technical measures of building performance. This assessment way may create a gap between measured and perceived performance from the user perspective. This raises the question of whether buildings certified with the LEED criteria are humane from the QoL experience of occupants in office buildings. Hence, this research is therefore to propose a new framework that takes into account not only sustainable but also humane factors for evaluating work environments. The study uses a mixed-methods approach – using both quantitative and qualitative methods and proceeds in three phases to comprehensively study occupants’ perceived QoL experience in two LEED and one conventional office building. Phase I uses observations to document the physical work environment and users’ behavioral interactions with the environment. Phase II uses interviews to describe the occupants’ QoL experience, explore the possible IEQ factors shaping their QoL, and to define the constructs of a humane work environment. Questionnaires were distributed concurrently to measure the relationship between occupants’ perceived QoL and IEQ factors that are derived from the literature. Phase III uses focus groups to converge and focus the results of the study. The results are analyzed separately and triangulated using an integrative mixed-methods analysis to interpret, corroborate, conclude, and increase the validation of the findings. The study compared occupants’ perceived QoL in «green» and «conventional» office buildings and revealed 32 quality factors (30 IEQ factors and two others) that influence the QoL experience in office work environments. Also the constructs of what composes a humane work environment based on occupants’ viewpoints have been identified. A new comprehensive, sustainable, and humane framework for assessing IEQ in work environments is developed. This framework guides the relationship between IEQ in work environments and occupants’ QoL as an environment-behavior system.

This study attempted to establish the travel behaviours and choice criteria of the South African domestic air passenger and how they differed between low-cost carriers (LCCs) and full-service carriers (FSCs). The study was quantitative and used structured questionnaires to collect data via personal interviews. Descriptive and inferential techniques were used to analyse the data, including a binomial logistic regression to identify predictors of model choice. Analysis This study attempted to establish the travel behaviours and choice criteria of the South African domestic air passenger and how they differed between low-cost carriers (LCCs) and full-service carriers (FSCs). The study was quantitative and used structured questionnaires to collect data via personal interviews. Descriptive and inferential techniques were used to analyse the data, including a binomial logistic regression to identify predictors of model choice. Analysis showed that passengers had a limited understanding of the functioning of the models. This results in consumer perceptions and expectations being discordant with the true differences. In distinguishing between models, LCC passengers rate LCCs more favourably than FSC passengers, but both rate FSCs higher than LCCs. This shows the need of consumers to have the features and services of the FSCs. Amongst the key findings was the absolute importance of price to the passengers on both models when purchasing the ticket. The analysis showed that LCC passengers are highly price sensitive and show loyalty to the lowest price (not airline model). It was apparent that frequent flyer programmes (FFP), or linkages to 3rd party loyalty programmes, for LCCs need to be reconsidered. Younger LCC passengers especially, indicated a need for a simple FFP to receive some form of ‘reward’, as well as benefits traditionally only offered by FSCs. FSC passengers show a greater degree of loyalty and less fare sensitivity. This provides the FSCs with a degree of fare flexibility and the opportunity to move their loyal, less price-sensitive consumers up the price curve to maximise revenue. It was shown that, in distinguishing themselves from FSCs, it is important that LCCs are perceived as being more affordable than FSCs and are offering a value-for-money service. In essence, LCCs have to defend their positioning by (i) ensuring that their fares are not perceived to be as high as a FSCs and (ii) watching that the FSC fares are not declining to a level where FSCs are perceived as being as cheap as a LCC. For LCCs, brand building strategies around issues other than fare need to be devised, with attention paid to identifying determinant factors. / Business Management / D. Com (Business Management)