## 1 Introduction
They reported that the predicted temperature matched the experimental one well, and the temperature distribution of the simulation model was also similar to that of the experimental one. In previous experimental research on thermal comfort in an automotive thermal environment, [PERSON] et al. [19] and [PERSON] et al. [20] investigated the thermal comfort of automobile passengers under indoor parking, outdoor parking, and outdoor driving conditions during summer. They reported that the internal air and surface temperatures of a vehicle were temporarily nonuniform, and the surface temperature in outdoor driving conditions changed more quickly than that in indoor and outdoor parking because of the rapid change of solar radiation. [PERSON] et al. [21] investigated the effects of individual responses on individual thermal comfort sensitivity and collective control according to temperature change. They confirmed that thermal comfort sensitivity had a statistically important role in group conditioning. Among the evaluated scenarios, in 85.9% of the cases (134 out of 152), statistically significant differences in temperature set points were observed in consideration of thermal comfort sensitivity, but the probability of having a comfortable state increased overall. [PERSON] et al. [22] performed a simulation study on the sensitivity of energy conversion to air quality, thermal comfort, and energy consumption in automobile interiors. They reported that the use of a cover for parking could reduce the windshielded transmittance by 5% and decreased the PMV by 0.9%. In addition, the thermal comfort and the energy consumption could be increased by controlling the supply air volume and temperature. [PERSON] et al. [23; 24; 25] evaluated temporal and non-uniform changes of vehicle interior temperature and relative humidity, as well as changes in the skin temperatures of the driver in the forehead, hands, and feet. They confirmed that the control of relative humidity during the heating and cooling process by the air-conditioning system could produce a comfortable environment more quickly than when the relative humidity was not controlled. In addition, in the experimental studies of bio-signal measurement for thermal comfort in an automotive environment, [PERSON] et al. [26] and [PERSON] et al. [27] quantified the fatigue progress of the driver using multipurpose and subjective measurements. A principal component analysis was used to measure the temporal decrease in driver performance from an alert state to a fatigued state using various measurements of driving performance throughout the experiment. They reported that 80 min was the limitation of safety in monotonous highway driving. [PERSON] et al. [28; 29] measured the bio-signals of the driver during heating and cooling by the HVAC system, and they reported that the cabin and vent outlet air temperatures should be set to 27.5 and 18.5 \({}^{\circ}\)C, respectively, to improve driver comfort and concentration in cooling mode without solar radiation. In heating mode, cabin and vent outlet temperatures of 25 and 30 \({}^{\circ}\)C were ideal. [PERSON] et al. [30] investigated the driver EEG parallel factors while driving a car, and they reported that the driver preferentially recognized the shape and color more than the distance and motion of a vehicle during driving. [PERSON] et al. [31] predicted driving behaviors based on EEG results under various traffic conditions using a simulation method. They found that the average classification accuracy of prediction was 69.5% and the highest accuracy was 83.5%. In addition, there was a significant correlation between the EEG pattern and car-following behavior. Most previously published studies on the thermal comfort in automobiles are analytical studies, and most experimental studies on the thermal comfort of drivers have been conducted by measuring only one of the bio-signals of the driver or passenger.