SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Mental Models”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Enabling Advanced Air Mobility Operations through Appropriate Trust in Human-Autonomy Teaming: Foundational Research Approaches and Applications

Emerging Advanced Air Mobility(AAM)operations will be enabled by increasingly autonomous systems, requiring technologies to take on more responsibilities and fundamentally altering traditional human-automation interaction paradigms. The growing reliance on higher levels of automation will necessitate research to identify capabilities and principles that facilitate humans and machines working and thinking better together, i.e., human-autonomy teaming (HAT). Trust is an inherent requirement in effective teams because when members work interdependently, those agents (human, automation) must be willing to accept a level of risk to rely upon each other to reach goals and contribute to team tasks. This work provides an initial approach to enabling AAM operations through appropriate trust within HAT. The main contributions of this approach resides in connecting the construct of trust to mental models. Using the outlined mental model approach, we propose novel HAT strategies, such as Adaptive Trust Calibration, and preview planned research activities derived from this approach. Additionally, we propose several practical applications that can currently be employed by AAM development communities.

Eric T Chancey↗

NASA NTRS2014

State Event Models for the Formal Analysis of Human-Machine Interactions

The work described in this paper was motivated by our experience with applying a framework for formal analysis of human-machine interactions (HMI) to a realistic model of an autopilot. The framework is built around a formally defined conformance relation called "fullcontrol" between an actual system and the mental model according to which the system is operated. Systems are well-designed if they can be described by relatively simple, full-control, mental models for their human operators. For this reason, our framework supports automated generation of minimal full-control mental models for HMI systems, where both the system and the mental models are described as labelled transition systems (LTS). The autopilot that we analysed has been developed in the NASA Ames HMI prototyping tool ADEPT. In this paper, we describe how we extended the models that our HMI analysis framework handles to allow adequate representation of ADEPT models. We then provide a property-preserving reduction from these extended models to LTSs, to enable application of our LTS-based formal analysis algorithms. Finally, we briefly discuss the analyses we were able to perform on the autopilot model with our extended framework.

State-event Models↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS2024

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Model Development

Systems engineering↗

NASA NTRS1988

A shared-world conceptual model for integrating space station life sciences telescience operations

Mental models of the Space Station and its ancillary facilities will be employed by users of the Space Station as they draw upon past experiences, perform tasks, and collectively plan for future activities. The operational environment of the Space Station will incorporate telescience, a new set of operational modes. To investigate properties of the operational environment, distributed users, and the mental models they employ to manipulate resources while conducting telescience, an integrating shared-world conceptual model of Space Station telescience is proposed. The model comprises distributed users and resources (active elements); agents who mediate interactions among these elements on the basis of intelligent processing of shared information; and telescience protocols which structure the interactions of agents as they engage in cooperative, responsive interactions on behalf of users and resources distributed in space and time. Examples from the life sciences are used to instantiate and refine the model's principles. Implications for transaction management and autonomy are discussed. Experiments employing the model are described which the authors intend to conduct using the Space Station Life Sciences Telescience Testbed currently under development at Ames Research Center.

Johnson, Vicki↗

NASA NTRS2015

Mini-Stamp as a Micro-Display for At-A-Glance Subsystem Information for DSN Links

Operators of the Deep Space Network (DSN) attend to numerous tasks with the overall goal of providing continuous support for the world's deep space missions. This high-stakes operations environment requires operators to understand the state of the Deep Space Network and predict what will happen next. Under the Follow-the-Sun initiative which requires remote operations of the highly complex telecommunications equipment, operators will need to remain aware of the state of the entire network rather than just their own facility, and transitioning fluidly between periods of low activity and periods of high demand. I designed a micro-display for operators to see, at a glance, the state of a Deep Space Network support including its subsystems. Using in-depth user-centered and participatory design techniques to identify information requirements, I designed what I called a Postage Stamp (NTR-49720) for individual operators to be able to maintain awareness of their own assigned supports. However, under Follow the Sun, operators must remain aware of all supports. The area occupied by the Postage Stamp must shrink to allow operators to see the state of the entire system, e.g., via a Big Board posted prominently in the operations room. Micro-displays are tools for mental model re-alignment, helping operators to keep their mental models of how the system works and behaves aligned with the changing state of the complex system. Data-driven micro-displays such as the Postage Stamp and Mini-Stamp display information about the system in a consistent way. Like a traffic light, the format of the micro-display never changes: the operator always knows where to look to find a specific piece of information. The Mini-Stamp always looks like the Mini-Stamp, and all of its data fields always lie in the same place on the micro-display. Real-time data flows through the Mini-Stamp to provide information to the operator.

Holloway, Alexandra↗

NASA NTRS1996

Managing Approach Plate Information Study (MAPLIST): An Information Requirements Analysis of Approach Chart Use

Adequately presenting all necessary information on an approach chart represents a challenge for cartographers. Since many tasks associated with using approach charts are cognitive (e.g., planning the approach and monitoring its progress), and since the characteristic of a successful interface is one that conforms to the users' mental models, understanding pilots' underlying models of approach chart information would greatly assist cartographers. To provide such information, a new methodology was developed for this study that enhances traditional information requirements analyses by combining psychometric scaling techniques with a simulation task to provide quantifiable links between pilots' cognitive representations of approach information and their use of approach information. Results of this study should augment previous information requirements analyses by identifying what information is acquired, when it is acquired, and what presentation concepts might facilitate its efficient use by better matching the pilots' cognitive model of the information. The primary finding in this study indicated that pilots mentally organize approach chart information into ten primary categories: communications, geography, validation, obstructions, navigation, missed approach, final items, other runways, visibility requirement, and navigation aids. These similarity categories were found to underlie the pilots' information acquisitions, other mental models, and higher level cognitive processes that are used to accomplish their approach and landing tasks.

Ricks, Wendell R.↗

NASA NTRS1990

Building an intelligent tutoring system for procedural domains

Jobs that require complex skills that are too expensive or dangerous to develop often use simulators in training. The strength of a simulator is its ability to mimic the 'real world', allowing students to explore and experiment. A good simulation helps the student develop a 'mental model' of the real world. The closer the simulation is to 'real life', the less difficulties there are transferring skills and mental models developed on the simulator to the real job. As graphics workstations increase in power and become more affordable they become attractive candidates for developing computer-based simulations for use in training. Computer based simulations can make training more interesting and accessible to the student.

Warinner, Andrew↗

NASA NTRS1998

Formal Aspects of Human-Automation Interaction

While new versions of automated control systems such as flight guidance systems are introduced at a rapid pace, it is widely recognized that user interaction with these machines is increasingly problematic. One cause for this difficulty that is commonly cited in the literature, is the discrepancy between the machine's behavior and the operator's (e.g., pilot) expectations. This paper discusses a formal approach to the analysis of operator's interaction with complex automated control systems. We focus attention on the issue of interface correctness; that is, on the question whether the display provides adequate information about the machine's configurations (states, modes, and associated parameters) and transitions, so as to enable the operator to successfully perform the specified set of tasks. To perform the analysis several assumptions are made: (1) A complete formal model of the machine's behavior is available (e.g., as a state transition system, or as a hybrid-machine); (2) A specification of operator's tasks is available and can be formally described (e.g., the reliable and predictable transition between activities involved in executing a climb to a new altitude); (3) The pilot is well trained and has a correct 'mental' model of the machine's response-map. By 'comparing' the machine's model with the set of operator's tasks we formally (i.e., mathematically) evaluate two questions: 1) does the machine's output interface (display) enable the operator to determine, unambiguously, what the current configuration (e.g., mode) of the machine is, and 2) does the display enable the operator to determine, unambiguously, what the next configuration of the machine will be, in response to a specified interaction by the operator (e.g., engaging a mode or changing a parameter such as a speed or target altitude). This paper describes a methodology for conducting such an evaluation using examples from automated flight control systems of modem 'glass cockpit' jetliners. Taxonomy of the different types of discrepancies that lead to pilot inability to resolve the current and next configuration of the machine is suggested. Data from incident reports involving 'mode confusion' is used to corroborate these discrepancies. Finally, means for compensating, either by augmenting the display and/or the operator's 'mental model' are briefly mentioned.

Degani, Asaf↗

NASA NTRS2005

Team Performance and Error Management in Chinese and American Simulated Flight Crews: The Role of Cultural and Individual Differences

This report describes results of a study conducted for NASA-Langley Research Center. This study is part of a program of research conducted for NASA-LARC that has focused on identifying the influence of national culture on the performance of flight crews. We first reviewed the literature devoted to models of teamwork and team performance, crew resource management, error management, and cross-cultural psychology. Davis (1999) reported the results of this review and presented a model that depicted how national culture could influence teamwork and performance in flight crews. The second study in this research program examined accident investigations of foreign airlines in the United States conducted by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The ability of cross-cultural values to explain national differences in flight outcomes was examined. Cultural values were found to covary in a predicted way with national differences, but the absence of necessary data in the NTSB reports and limitations in the research method that was used prevented a clear understanding of the causal impact of cultural values. Moreover, individual differences such as personality traits were not examined in this study. Davis and Kuang (2001) report results of this second study. The research summarized in the current report extends this previous research by directly assessing cultural and individual differences among students from the United States and China who were trained to fly in a flight simulator using desktop computer workstations. The research design used in this study allowed delineation of the impact of national origin, cultural values, personality traits, cognitive style, shared mental model, and task workload on teamwork, error management and flight outcomes. We briefly review the literature that documents the importance of teamwork and error management and its impact on flight crew performance. We next examine teamwork and crew resource management training designed to improve teamwork. This is followed by discussion of the potential influence of national culture on teamwork and crew resource management. We then examine the influence of other individual and team differences, such as personality traits, cognitive style, shared mental model, and task workload. We provide a heuristic model that depicts the influence of national culture and individual differences on teamwork, error management and flight outcomes. The results demonstrate the usefulness of the model for future research.

Davis, Donald D.↗

DOE OSTI2022

Always look on the bright side of life: Taking a different perspective on cybersecurity performance

This presentation will introduce participants to key mental models on how to think about and understand safety from two of the leading voices in the discipline – Dr. Erik Hollnagel and Dr. Todd Conklin – and from there we ask the simple question of “how can we apply this to cybersecurity?” At the completion of this presentation attendees will be able to describe Dr. Hollnagel’s Safety-II approach and Dr. Conkiln’s definition of safety as “not the absence of accidents but the presence of effective defenses.” They will be able to explain how these ideas translate to the cybersecurity world broadly, and more specifically to operational technology cybersecurity where physical safety consequences are coupled to control system performance. Finally, participants will be able to identify how selected principles from Weick and Sutcliffe’s high reliability organization theory can help operationalize these key mental models around safety, for improved organizational cybersecurity over the long run.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

NASA NTRS2022

Directed Acyclic Graphs: A Tool for Understanding the NASA Human Spaceflight System Risks - Human System Risk Board

For over a decade, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has tracked and configuration-managed approximately 30 risks to astronaut health and performance that occur before, during and after spaceflight. The Human System Risk Board (HSRB), a Health and Medical Technical Authority (HMTA) Board at NASA Johnson Space Center, is the entity responsible for identifying, assessing, analyzing, and monitoring the official understanding of the risk or risk posture for each of the Human System Risks and determining – based on evaluation of the available evidence – when that risk posture changes. The ultimate purpose of tracking and researching these risks is to find ways to reduce the risk that astronaut crews face during spaceflight. Historically, research, development and operations relevant to one risk have been conducted in isolation from other risks; these individual risk ‘silos’ enabled initial characterization of each specific risk. In spaceflight however, the impact of exposure to risk for astronaut crews is cumulative, and not independent of exposures or other risks, as all the adverse effects of the spaceflight environment begin at launch, continue throughout the duration of the mission and in some cases across the lifetime of the crews. In January of 2020, the HSRB at NASA embarked on a pilot project designed to assess the potential value of causal diagramming as a tool to facilitate understanding of these cumulative and interdependent effects as applied within Human System Risk management. This process uses directed acyclic graphs as a means of formalizing a shared mental model of the causal flow of risk among Risk Board stakeholders. Initially this model was to improve communication among those stakeholders, but the potential value exceeds communication alone. The causal diagrams are formulated as directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to function as a type of knowledge graph for reference for the board and its stakeholders. This document is a sister document to NASA/TM 20220006812 Directed Acyclic Graph Guidance Documentation (1). In that document, the basic guidance for creating and standardizing directed acyclic graphs as tools for cross-risk analysis is provided. This document contains the initial configuration managed DAGs that were created as a result of applying those principles. These initial versions were accepted by the HSRB in January of 2022. Each of the Human System Risks are represented by a DAG that has been reviewed by the larger Human Health and Performance community at NASA including life scientists, physical scientists, physicians, nurses, pharmacists, exercise specialists and more. These results show the starting point for Human System Risk DAGs as shared mental models and communication aids across the boundaries of the various expertise needed to understand and mitigate the human risks in spaceflight. Because they are a starting point, each of these DAGs can be expected to change over time as new or refined evidence becomes available. The process for updating these DAGs can be found in the JSC-66705 Human System Risk Management Plan (2) that is publicly available on the NASA Technical Reports Server.

Erik L. Antonsen↗

DOE OSTI2022

Information needs, approaches, and case studies in human health risk communication

This article uses ten case studies to illustrate the information needs, various communication approaches, and the communicator's role in explaining environmental health risks from a variety of hazards, to a variety of audiences, over time frames from days to years, using in person consultation, lectures, zooms, and email formats. Events often had a long history before the communication began and may have had a long tail afterward. Audiences may be public officials, companies, workers, communities, or individuals. Each individual may have their own understanding or mental model regarding the hazard, exposure, and risk. The communicator's role or intention may be to reassure an audience that has unrealistic exaggerated concerns or fears or to protect a client if the fears are realistic. Or it may be altruistic to inform a complacent audience to take the risks it faces more seriously. Although risk assessment research has advanced the techniques for communicating abstruse probabilities to audiences with low numeracy, in my experience, audiences are unimpressed by precise–sounding probability numbers, and are more interested in whether exposure is occurring or may occur and how to stop it. Often audiences have reason to be outraged and may be more concerned about punishing wrong doers than about the hazard itself, particularly when the exposure is past and cannot be undone. Thus, there is a difference between discussing the riskiness of a situation (risk communication) and what you are going to do about the situation (risk management). Risk communication is successful when the audience responds as intended, calming down or taking action. These case studies are drawn from a large number of risk communication experiences that I and my Rutgers colleagues have engaged in over the past four decades. Through the 20th century, New Jersey was the most densely industrialized State in United States. New Jersey experienced growth of the chemical and petrochemical industries and the unfortunately profligate disposal of toxic wastes. Having the most Superfund sites of any state is a dubious distinction, but New Jersey also has the most experience in evaluating and responding to these hazards.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

NASA NTRS2022

Supporting Hazard Analysis for Wildfire Response Using fmdtools and MIKA

The System Wide Safety (SWS) Safety Demonstrator (SD) Series drives development of an increasingly capable In-Time Aviation Safety Management System (IASMS) focusing on humanitarian applications, starting with wildfire response (SD-1). The goals of this report are to (1) provide an early hazard analysis and mitigation evaluation of wildfire response to support these efforts and (2) provide a demonstration of capabilities of the Fault Model Design Tools (fmdtools) and Manager for Intelligent Knowledge Access (MIKA) tools. fmdtools provides a modeling, simulation, and resiliency analysis framework in which a wildfire response model, the System Modeling and Analysis of Resiliency in Scalable Traffic Management for Emergency Response Operations (SMARt-STEReO), is built. MIKA is an intelligent knowledge manager with several capabilities, including assisting in hazard analysis by extracting and analyzing hazards from historical incident reports. The following topics are covered in the report: Understanding Wildfire Hazard Dynamics. We provide a description and simulated examples of how hazards occur in the SMARt-STEReO model of wildfire response and their effect on its outcome. This provides a common mental model and focuses the analysis presented in the remainder of the report. Wildfire Hazard Identification. MIKA identifies wildfire hazards from three relevant datasets: the ICS-209-PLUS, SAFECOM, and SAFENET. Hazards are manually organized into a taxonomy and MIKA analyzes each hazard’s effects, likelihood, severity, and risk. Evaluating Mitigation Strategies. The SMARt-STEReO wildfire response model built in fmdtools evaluates a subset of identified hazards. Specifically, we simulate the effect of communications faults and equipment faults on operator safety, the effect of changing winds and flammability, and a scenario with multiple ignition points and heavy smoke. Tool Limitations and Usage Considerations. We provide a discussion of appropriate tool use cases as well as limitations and considerations for usage. The tool findings are used to synthesize recommendations for wildfire response operations, which can be captured as part of an IASMS. Key recommendations are as follows: Hazards are identified from a broad spectrum of sources including aircraft subsystems, operational sources, and ground crew operations. Highest risk operational environment hazards identified are Evacuations. The highest risk manned aerial operations hazard categorized is Jumper Operations Mishap. Ground crew hazards that are highest risk are Burns, Cargo Operations Overhead, Dehydration, Entrapment, Falling Objects, Heart Attacks, Heat Exhaustion, Inadequate Training or Certification, Vehicle Breakdown, and Vehicle Collision. Modelled containment failures arise from a mismatch between the difficulty of the firefighting scenario and the capacity (e.g., speed, effectiveness, awareness) of the response. In firefighting scenarios where containment is possible (e.g., because the fire does not spread too quickly), these mismatches can occur because of a change in environmental conditions (e.g., wind, flammability, etc) or because of planning, equipment, or communications faults. Improvements to communications increase the capacity of the firefighting response by reducing the time needed to respond to the fire. While surveillance does not increase this capacity by itself, it increases operator safety by increasing state awareness, enabling firefighters to evade approaching fires. Increasing both has a synergistic effect. In general, these performance and resilience increases generalize over fault scenarios as well as unforeseen changes to circumstances (i.e., wind, aridity, etc.). However, these improvements need to be designed so as not to make the system prone to persistent large-scale communications outages, which can reduce performance.

Hazard analysis↗

NASA NTRS1995

Cognitive models of pilot categorization and prioritization of flight-deck information

In the past decade, automated systems on modern commercial flight decks have increased dramatically. Pilots now regularly interact and share tasks with these systems. This interaction has led human factors research to direct more attention to the pilot's cognitive processing and mental model of the information flow occurring on the flight deck. The experiment reported herein investigated how pilots mentally represent and process information typically available during flight. Fifty-two commercial pilots participated in tasks that required them to provide similarity ratings for pairs of flight-deck information and to prioritize this information under two contextual conditions. Pilots processed the information along three cognitive dimensions. These dimensions included the flight function and the flight action that the information supported and how frequently pilots refer to the information. Pilots classified the information as aviation, navigation, communications, or systems administration information. Prioritization results indicated a high degree of consensus among pilots, while scaling results revealed two dimensions along which information is prioritized. Pilot cognitive workload for flight-deck tasks and the potential for using these findings to operationalize cognitive metrics are evaluated. Such measures may be useful additions for flight-deck human performance evaluation.

Jonsson, Jon E.↗

DOE OSTI2026

What Is the Agent Doing? Visualizing Agentic AI Querying Workflows

We explore how visualizations can help users understand what an AI agent is doing as it builds and runs queries over data. As part of the LinkQ system, a natural language interface for querying knowledge graphs with a large language model (LLM), we designed two complementary views: A State Diagram that shows where the agent is within a larger workflow, and a Live Action Display that gives real-time updates about the agent's current task. In a study with 14 practitioners, we found that these visuals helped participants build stronger mental models of the agent's behavior while also increasing their confidence in the system. However, we also observed that users sometimes trusted incorrect outputs simply because the agent appeared to be doing the "right" thing. Our findings point to both the value and risk of visualizing agent behavior in interactive AI systems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

NASA NTRS1988

Information processing

Theoretical models of sensory-information processing by the human brain are reviewed from a human-factors perspective, with a focus on their implications for aircraft and avionics design. The topics addressed include perception (signal detection and selection), linguistic factors in perception (context provision, logical reversals, absence of cues, and order reversals), mental models, and working and long-term memory. Particular attention is given to decision-making problems such as situation assessment, decision formulation, decision quality, selection of action, the speed-accuracy tradeoff, stimulus-response compatibility, stimulus sequencing, dual-task performance, task difficulty and structure, and factors affecting multiple task performance (processing modalities, codes, and stages).

Wickens, Christopher D.↗

DOE OSTI2023

“Shoulda, Coulda, Woulda”: Conceptualizing the Differences in Trust Between Human-Human Teaming and Human-Machine Teaming

Intelligent decision support systems (IDSSs) are machine teammates designed to facilitate better human decision-making in high-consequence domains such as health care, power grid operations, and fraud detection. IDSSs identify patterns in datasets and provide intelligent decision-making recommendations to human teammates. However, previous research indicates that humans often trust IDSS recommendations less than the recommendations from their human teammates, even when the machine teammate is more accurate. To conceptualize why trust differs, we review the literature surrounding trust, error, and predictability. Then, we compile and compare participant trust ratings and decision-making in an abridged systematic review of previous studies manipulating teammate type, error rate, and error type. Finally, we conduct a content analysis of participants’ qualitative responses to trust queries from a survey on generative language models. Results suggest that humans may trust IDSS teammates less than other human teammates because of differences in (1) interaction complexity, (2) blame attribution, and (3) swift trust. We conclude that human factors practitioners should collaborate with data scientists and domain experts to build and maintain trust in IDSSs by anthropomorphizing algorithms, matching mental models, and considering individual differences.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗