2, the sight line monitoring unit C12 determines that the driver does not recognize the risk target (S350—NO), and causes the process to proceed to step S360.

In step S360, the reporting control unit C13 causes the output unit SPK to output a reporting sound to report (first reporting) the existence of the risk targets 450 and 460 to the driver, on the basis of the determination result in step S350. That is, when, on the basis of the determination of the sight line monitoring unit C12, the driver recognizes the obstacle and the driver does not recognize the risk target, the reporting control unit C13 causes the output unit SPK to output the reporting sound and performs reporting on the driver.

On the other hand, when a state in which the sight line of the driver overlaps the risk target is detected in the determination in step S350, the sight line monitoring unit C12 determines that the driver has recognized the risk target (S350—YES), and causes the process to proceed to step S380.

In the state of step S380, the driver recognizes the obstacles 410 and 420 (S340—YES), and the driver recognizes the risk targets 450 and 460 (S350—YES). In this state, the reporting control unit C13 does not perform reporting in order to suppress complicated reporting. That is, the reporting control unit C13 does not perform reporting when the driver recognizes the obstacle as well as the risk target on the basis of the determination of the sight line monitoring unit C12.

According to the present embodiment, it is possible to provide reporting technology capable of reporting a risk not recognized by the driver from the viewpoint of improving traffic safety while suppressing reporting of a risk recognized by the driver.

Second Embodiment

Next, processing of a reporting device 100 in a second embodiment will be described. FIG. 5 is a flowchart illustrating a flow of processing of the reporting device 100, and the same processes as those in the flowchart described in FIG. 3 are denoted by the same step numbers, and description thereof is omitted. The flowchart of FIG. 5 is different from the processing of FIG. 3 of the first embodiment in that processing of step S510 is added after processing of step S350—NO and before reporting is performed in step S360.

In step S510, a reporting control unit C13 acquires a relative distance between a position P2 of a vehicle 200 (self-vehicle) and P1 of a front obstacle (for example, obstacles 410 and 420 in FIG. 4) from a recognition processing unit C11. Then, the reporting control unit C13 determines whether or not the acquired relative distance is equal to or less than a threshold distance. When the relative distance is larger than the threshold distance (S510—NO), the process returns to step S350, and the determination processing in steps S350 and S510 is similarly repeated. Here, the state in which the relative distance is larger than the threshold distance is a state in which there is still a margin in terms of distance from the viewpoint of conflicting with the front obstacle. In this state, the driver recognizes the existence of the risk target (S350—YES) before the reporting device 100 performs the reporting, and the operation of avoiding the conflict with the risk target is high. Therefore, until the relative distance becomes equal to or less than the threshold distance (S510—YES), the reporting control unit C13 performs control so as not to output the reporting sound from the output unit SPK.

When the relative distance is equal to or less than the threshold distance in the determination processing of step S510 (S510—YES), the process proceeds to step S360, and the reporting control unit C13 causes the output unit SPK to output a reporting sound to report the existence of the risk targets 450 and 460 to the driver on the basis of the determination result of step S350.

According to the present embodiment, it is possible to provide reporting technology capable of reporting a risk not recognized by the driver from the viewpoint of improving traffic safety while suppressing reporting of a risk recognized by the driver.

(First Modification)

When a state in which the sight line of the driver overlaps the risk target is detected after the reporting (S360) described in the first embodiment and the second embodiment, the sight line monitoring unit C12 may determine that the driver has recognized the risk target, and the reporting control unit C13 may perform control so that the reporting (third reporting) is performed at a reporting level (for example, the reporting intensity such as the volume of the reporting sound) lower than the reporting level in the reporting (first reporting) in step S360 on the basis of the determination result of the sight line monitoring unit C12. Note that the present example is not limited to the reporting (third reporting) at the low reporting level (reporting intensity), and the reporting control unit C13 may perform control to stop the output of the reporting sound from the output unit SPK when the sight line monitoring unit C12 determines that the driver has recognized the risk target. According to the present example, it is possible to report a risk not recognized by the driver from the viewpoint of improving traffic safety while suppressing the reporting level of the risk recognized by the driver.

(Second Modification)

After the reporting (S360) described in the first embodiment and the second embodiment, when the interface unit C3 (I/F unit) acquires the information regarding the braking operation of the driver, the reporting control unit C13 may perform control so that the reporting (third reporting) is performed at a reporting level (for example, the reporting intensity such as the volume of the reporting sound) lower than the reporting level in the reporting (first reporting) in step S360. Note that the present example is not limited to the reporting (third reporting) at the low reporting level (reporting intensity), and the reporting control unit C13 may perform control to stop the output of the reporting sound from the output unit SPK when the information regarding the braking operation of the driver is acquired.

In addition, as described in the first modification, when the interface unit C3 (I/F unit) acquires the information regarding the braking operation of the driver after the reporting (third reporting), the reporting control unit C13 may perform control to perform reporting (fourth reporting) at a reporting level (reporting intensity) lower than the reporting level in the reporting (third reporting). According to the present example, it is possible to report a risk not recognized by the driver from the viewpoint of improving traffic safety while suppressing the reporting level of the risk recognized by the driver.

(Third Modification)

FIG. 6 is a diagram schematically illustrating a third modification of the reporting processing, and illustrates a state in which the vehicle