Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Design of the Augmented Reality Based Training System to Promote Spatial Visualization Ability for Older Adults Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2015 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Human-Computer Collaboration in Adaptive Supervisory Control and Function Allocation of Autonomous System Teams

verfasst von : Robert S. Gutzwiller, Douglas S. Lange, John Reeder, Rob L. Morris, Olinda Rodas

Erschienen in: Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The foundation for a collaborative, man-machine system for adaptive performance of tasks in a multiple, heterogeneous unmanned system teaming environment is discussed. An autonomics system is proposed to monitor missions and overall system attributes, including those of the operator, autonomy, states of the world, and the mission. These variables are compared within a model of the global system, and strategies that re-allocate tasks can be executed based on a mission-health perspective (such as relieving an overloaded user by taking over incoming tasks). Operators still have control over the allocation via a task manager, which also provides a function allocation interface, and accomplishes an initial attempt at transparency. We plan to learn about configurations of function allocation from human-in-the-loop experiments, using machine learning and operator feedback. Integrating autonomics, machine learning, and operator feedback is expected to improve collaboration, transparency, and human-machine performance.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Occlusion Management in Augmented Reality Systems for Machine-Tools
Nächstes Kapitel ARTiSt — An Augmented Reality Testbed for Intelligent Technical Systems
Literatur
1.
Sheridan, T.B.: Humans and automation: Systems design and research issues. Human Factors and Ergnomics Society Wiley, Santa Monica/New York (2002)
2.
Finn, A., Scheding, S.: Developments and Challenges for Autonomous Unmanned Systems, p. 237. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg (2010)CrossRef
3.
Willard, R.: Rediscover the art of command and control. Proc. - United States Nav. Inst. 128(10), 52–54 (2002)
4.
Sheridan, T.B., Parasuraman, R.: Human-automation interaction. Rev. Hum. Factors Ergonomics 1(41), 89–129 (2005)CrossRef
5.
Tucker, P.: Inside the Navy’s secret swarm robot experiment. Defense One, 05 October 2014
6.
Chen, J.Y.C., Barnes, M.J.: Human–agent teaming for multirobot control: a review of human factors issues. IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 44(1), 13–29 (2014)CrossRef
7.
Endsley, M.R., Kaber, D.B.: Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics 42(3), 462–492 (1999)CrossRef
8.
Kaber, D.B., Endsley, M.R.: The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 5(2), 113–153 (2004)CrossRef
9.
Cummings, M.L., How, J., Whitten, A., Toupet, O.: The impact of human-automation collaboration in decentralized multiple unmanned vehicle control. In: Proceedings IEEE (2011)
10.
Bainbridge, L.: Ironies of automation. Automatica 19(6), 775–779 (1983)CrossRef
11.
Endsley, M.R., Kiris, E.O.: The out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Hum. Factors 37(2), 381–394 (1995)CrossRef
12.
Kirlik, A.: Modeling strategic behavior in human-automation interaction: why an ‘aid’ can (and should) go unused. Hum. Factors 35(2), 221–242 (1993)
13.
Parasuraman, R., Manzey, D.H.: Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Hum. Factors 52(3), 381–410 (2010)CrossRef
14.
Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T.B., Wickens, C.D.: A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Hum. 30(3), 286–297 (2000)CrossRef
15.
Onnasch, L., Wickens, C.D., Li, H., Manzey, D.: Human performance consequences of stages and levels of automation: an integrated meta-analysis. Hum. Factors 56(3), 476–488 (2014)CrossRef
16.
Rovira, E., McGarry, K., Parasuraman, R.: Effects of imperfect automation on decision making in a simulated command and control task. Hum. Factors 49(1), 76–87 (2007)CrossRef
17.
Miller, C.A., Parasuraman, R.: Designing for flexible interaction between humans and automation: delegation interfaces for supervisory control. Hum. Factors 49(1), 57–75 (2007)CrossRef
18.
Parasuraman, R., Galster, S., Squire, P., Furukawa, H., Miller, C.: A Flexible Delegation-Type Interface Enhances System Performance in Human Supervision of Multiple Robots: Empirical Studies With RoboFlag. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Hum. 35(4), 481–493 (2005)CrossRef
19.
Squire, P.N., Parasuraman, R.: Effects of automation and task load on task switching during human supervision of multiple semi-autonomous robots in a dynamic environment. Ergonomics 53(8), 951–961 (2010)CrossRef
20.
Scallen, S.F., Hancock, P.A.: Implementing adaptive function allocation. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 11(2), 197–221 (2001)CrossRef
21.
Parasuraman, R., Mouloua, M., Molloy, R.: Effects of adaptive task allocation on monitoring automation. Hum. Factors 38(4), 665–679 (1996)CrossRef
22.
Feigh, K., Dorneich, M.C., Hayes, C.C.: Toward a characterization of adaptive systems: a framework for researchers and system designers. Hum. Factors 54(6), 1008–1024 (2012)CrossRef
23.
Kaber, D.B.: Adaptive Automation, In: Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Engineering, J. Lee and A. Kirlik, Eds. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2013)
24.
Pritchett, A.R., Kim, S.Y., Feigh, K.M.: Measuring human-automation function allocation. J. Cogn. Eng. Decis. Mak. 8(1), 52–77 (2013)CrossRef
25.
Garlan, D., Cheng, S., Huang, A., Schmerl, B., Steenkiste, P.: Rainbow: architecture-based self-adaptation with reusable infrastructure. IEEE Comput. 37(10), 46–54 (2004)CrossRef
26.
Cummings, M.: Operator interaction with centralized versus decentralized UAV architectures. HAL Lab MIT Dep. Aeronaut. Astronaut., pp. 1–13, 2013
27.
Cummings, M., Mastracchio, C., Thornburg, K., Mkrtchyan, A.: Boredom and Distraction in Multiple Unmanned Vehicle Superisory Control. Interact. Comput. 25(1), 34–47 (2013)
28.
Scerbo, M.W.: Theoretical perspectives on adaptive automation. In: Parasuraman, R., Mouloua, M. (eds.) Automation and Human Performance: Theory and Applications, pp. 37–63. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ (1996)
29.
Johnson, A.W., Oman, C.M., Sheridan, T.B., Duda, K.R.: Dynamic task allocation in operational systems: Issues, gaps, and recommendations. In: 2014 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1–15 (2014)
30.
Wilson, G., Russell, C.: Performance enhancement in an uninhabited air vehicle task using psychophysiologically determined adaptive aiding. Hum. Factors 49(6), 1005–1018 (2007)CrossRef
31.
Ratwani, R., McCurry, J.M., Trafton, J.G.: Single operator, multiple robots: an eye movement based theoretic model of operator situation awareness. In: Present. 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference Human-Robot Interact, pp. 235–242 (2010)
32.
Breslow, L., Gartenberg, D., McCurry, J.M., Trafton, J.: Dynamic operator overload: a model for predicting workload during supervisory control. IEEE Trans. Hum.-Mach. Syst. 44(1), 30–40 (2014)CrossRef
33.
de Greef, T., Arciszewski, H., Neerincx, M.: Adaptive automation based on an object-oriented task model: implementation and evaluation in a realistic C2 environment. J. Cogn. Eng. Decis. Mak 4(2), 152–182 (2010)CrossRef
34.
Bailey, N.R., Scerbo, M.W., Freeman, F.G., Mikulka, P.J., Scott, L.A.: Comparison of a brain-based adaptive system and a manual adaptable system for invoking automation. Hum. Factors 48(4), 693–709 (2006)CrossRef
35.
Kaber, D., Wright, M., Prinzel, L., Clamann, M.: Adaptive automation of human-machine system information-processing functions. Hum. Factors 47, 730–741 (2005)CrossRef
36.
Rouse, W.: Adaptive aiding for human/computer control. Hum. Factors 30(4), 431–443 (1988)
37.
Inagaki, T.: Adaptive automation: sharing and trading of control, In: Handbook of Cognitive Task Design, Hollnagel, E. (ed.), LEA, pp. 147–169 (2003)
38.
Rodas, M., DiVita, J., Morris, R.: Introducing a task prioritization tool in a complex supervisory control environment. Cogn. Methods Situat. Aware. Decis. Support, pp. 79–82, 2014
39.
Chandrasekaran, B., Johnson, T.R., Smith, J.W.: Task-structure analysis for knowledge modeling. Commun. ACM 33(9), 124–136 (1992)CrossRef
40.
Dodhia, R., Dismukes, R.: Interruptions create prospective memory tasks. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 89, 73–89 (2009)CrossRef
41.
Dismukes, R., Nowinski, J.: Prospective memory, concurrent task management, and pilot error. In: Kramer, A., Wiegmann, D., Kirlik, A. (eds.) Attention: From theory to practice, pp. 225–236. Oxford University Press, New York (2007)
Metadaten
Titel
Human-Computer Collaboration in Adaptive Supervisory Control and Function Allocation of Autonomous System Teams
verfasst von
Robert S. Gutzwiller
Douglas S. Lange
John Reeder
Rob L. Morris
Olinda Rodas
Copyright-Jahr
2015
Buch
Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-21066-7

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-21067-4

Copyright-Jahr: 2015

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21067-4_46

Neuer Inhalt

    Bildnachweise