A Case for Theory-Based Research on Level of Automation and Adaptive Automation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – A Case for Theory-Based Research on Level of Automation and Adaptive Automation PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 7aa3b4-ZTQzM



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

A Case for Theory-Based Research on Level of Automation and Adaptive Automation

Description:

A Case for Theory-Based Research on Level of Automation and Adaptive Automation David B. Kaber Department of Industrial Engineering North Carolina State University – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:75
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 19
Provided by: Davi1797
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: A Case for Theory-Based Research on Level of Automation and Adaptive Automation


1
A Case for Theory-Based Research on Level of
Automation and Adaptive Automation
  • David B. Kaber
  • Department of Industrial Engineering
  • North Carolina State University

This work was supported by a grant through the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Langley Research Center. The opinions expressed
are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect the views of NASA.
2
Thoughts on the what, how and when of
automation
How?
Level of Automation (LOA)
Machine
Human/Machine
Human
When?
Tn
T0
Monitoring
Adaptive Automation (AA)
Generating
Selecting
Implementing
Stages of Information Processing
What?
Adapted from Endsley (1997).
3
Information Processing and Automation Design
Theory
  • Qualitative models relating stages of information
    processing to automation design.
  • Parasuraman et al. (2000) Model of types and
    levels of automation.

Information Acquisition
Information Analysis
Decision-making
Action
High
High
High
High
Degree of Automation
Low
Low
Low
Low
A model of types and levels of automation (from
Parasuraman et al. (2000)).
4
Qualitative Models of Human-Automation
Interaction (cont.)
  • Endsley Kaber (1999)
  • Four-stage model of information processing.
  • Used to define levels of automation or function
    allocation schemes.

Monitoring
Generating
Selecting
Implementing
Human Human/Machine Machine
Human Human/Machine Machine
Human Human/Machine Machine
Human Human/Machine Machine
Level of Automation
Adapted from Endsley and Kabers (1999) taxonomy
of levels of automation.
5
Taxonomy of Levels of Automation
  • Endsley Kaber (1999)
  • 10 discrete levels of automation (LOAs) in
    complex systems control.

6
Bases for Qualitative Models
  • Common models of HUMAN information processing
    (HIP).
  • Sanders McCormick (1993) Multi-stage model
    identifying functions of humans and machines.

Automaticity
Sensing - Perception
Information Processing
Decision-making
Action Functions
Feedback
Adapted from Sanders and McCormicks (1993) model
of human and machine functions in human-machine
systems.
7
Another Basis for Current Models
  • Wickens (1992) Model of HIP influential in
    Parasuraman et al. (2000) model of types and LOAs.

Perception
Decision-making
Response Execution
Short-term Sensory Store
Working Memory
Long-term Memory
Feedback
Model of human information processing (adapted
from Wickens (1992)).
8
Applying Information Processing Models to
Automation Design
  • Parasuraman et al. (2000) and Endsley Kaber
    (1999) models
  • Present ways of classifying functions of
    human-machine systems.

Mission Analysis
Function Analysis
Task Analysis
Basic System Concept
Initial Function Allocation
Dynamic Function Allocation
Determine how to automate?
Determine what to automate?
Determine when to automate?
Note Entire process is similar to Wickens (1992)
approach to systems design.
9
Unique Aspects of Approach
  • Historical function allocation lists
    technology-centered (Fitts, 1956)
  • Advances in understanding of out-of-the (control)
    loop performance (Endsley Kiris, 1995 Kaber et
    al., 1998) shifted focus of lists on human
    abilities.
  • Contemporary taxonomies of LOA (e.g., Endsley
    Kaber (1999)) developed by considering
    performance consequences of automation
  • Complacency, vigilance decrements, loss of SA,
    skill decay.
  • Link LOAs to stages of information processing.
  • Types of functions considered are general
    information processing functions.
  • Compare with Sheridan Verplanks (1978)
    hierarchy of LOAs Functions primarily represent
    action states (gets, starts, etc.) or choice
    reactions (selects).

10
Importance of Research
  • Link general theories on information processing
    and automation to applications.
  • Parasuraman et al. (2000) - Application of model
    to air traffic control (ATC).
  • Contemporary models of human-automation
    interaction (HAI) may serve as design rationale
    for human-centered automation.
  • Knowledge of performance with systems can be
    classified according to model and used to further
    develop general theory on HAI.
  • Theory may serve to answer several questions
  • What stages of information processing are
    conducive to automation from human perspective?
  • To what extent can stage be automated
    safely/effectively?
  • What stages are robust to automation reliability
    problems?

11
Theoretical Research Challenges
  • Validate processing stages of models in terms of
    representation of actual functions performed by
    human-machine systems.
  • Models can be used for logical function
    allocation, but practical implications are
    difficult to predict.
  • Endsley Kaber (1999)
  • Intermediate LOAs moderate workload, maintain
    situation awareness (SA) and improve performance.
  • Low level automation produced superior
    performance, but at cost of SA.
  • Good SA observed under high LOAs.

Hypothesis
Results
12
Example Model Application
  • Applied Endsley Kabers taxonomy of LOAs to
    advanced commercial aircraft (MD-11) (Tan et al.,
    2000)
  • Conducted complex systems analysis.
  • Developed high-fidelity simulation for evaluation
    of existing system automation.
  • Categorized actual modes of automation according
    to taxonomy.

13
Flight Simulator Displays
Flight Control Panel (FCP)
Flight Mode Annunciator (FMA)
Out-of-Cockpit View
Throttle/attitude control
Primary Flight Display (PFD)
Navigation Display (ND)
Multi-functional Control Display Unit (MCDU)
14
Defining Aircraft Automation in Terms of Taxonomy
of LOA
  • Taxonomy and example LOA description

15
Research to Enhance Basic Understanding of
Automation
  • Adaptive automation (AA) (or when to automate)
    primarily studied using laboratory simulations of
    complex systems.
  • Majority of AA research investigates concept from
    binary perspective.
  • Automation is continuous variable made discrete
    for research purposes.

Study AA in high-fidelity simulations, or in
context.
1
Study AA by considering many points along
continuum of automation.
2
Decision Support
Full Automation
Binary Approach
Continuous Approach
Supervisory Control
Supervisory Control
Action Support
Automation
Manual Control
Decision Support
When?
Batch Processing
Manual Control
Tn
T0
16
Considering Models of HAI in Adaptive Systems
Research
Study impact of AA on latter stages of
information processing.
  • Focus of AA research has been on early stages of
    information processing
  • Do not have understanding of effect of AA on
    decision-making and planning.
  • People may not adapt well to dynamic allocations
    of decision functions.
  • Research has not systematically examined
    performance and SA effects of dynamic function
    allocations (DFAs) across stages of information
    processing.

3
Parasuraman et al. (1993)
Study SA and performance effects of AA across
functions represented in models of HAI.
4
Study impact of AA applied exclusively to each
stage of information processing.
5
17
Final Issues
  • Computer authority shown to reduce excessive
    cyclings between control modes (Hilburn et al.,
    1993).
  • Automation directed DFAs improve human manual
    control operator does not need to evaluate who
    should be doing what (Kaber Riley, 1999).
  • Approach AA research cautiously - complexity of
    system design may cause mode awareness problems
    (Sarter Woods, 1995).
  • Need to determine who (human or automation)
    should have authority over DFAs

Compare voluntary, involuntary and shared DFA
management
6
Consider need to keep-track of LOAs in AA studies.
7
18
Conclusions
  • Cant study AA without considering LOA concepts
    like peas and carrots (F. Gump).
  • Taxonomies of LOA provide means for
    systematically studying complexities of
    automation.
  • Need to apply models of HAI to real systems to
    expand theory to design rationales.
  • Classify systems and understand underlying
    factors in automated system performance.
  • Need to develop framework of AA research.
About PowerShow.com