Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human-Autonomy”

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.

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

At least 55 records · Page 3

Single Operator Control of Multiple UAS: A Supervisory Delegation Approach

This presentation will be given as part of the UAS EXCOM Science and Research Panel's (SARP) workshop on multiple UAS controlled by a single operator. Participants were asked to identify public use cases for multiple Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) control and identify research, policy, and technical gaps in those operations. The purpose of this workshop is to brainstorm, categorize, and prioritize those use cases and gaps. Here, I will discuss research performed on this topic when I worked for the Army and on-going work within the division and a NATO working group on Human-Autonomy Teaming.

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS)↗

Crew Resource Management for Automated Teammates (CRM-A)

Crew Resource Management (CRM) is the application of human factors knowledge and skills to ensure that teams make effective use of all resources. This includes ensuring that pilots bring in opinions of other teammates and utilize their unique capabilities. CRM was originally developed 40 years ago in response to a number of airline accidents in which the crew was found to be at fault. The goal was to improve teamwork among airline cockpit crews. The notion of "team" was later expanded to include cabin crew and ground resources. CRM has also been adopted by other industries, most notably medicine. Automation research now finds itself faced with similar issues to those faced by aviation 40 years ago: how to create a more robust system by making full use of both the automation and its human operators. With advances in machine intelligence, processing speed and cheap and plentiful memory, automation has advanced to the point that it can and should be treated as a teammate to fully take advantage of its capabilities and contributions to the system. This area of research is known as Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT). Research on HAT has identified reusable patterns that can be applied in a wide range of applications. These patterns include features such as bi-directional communication and working agreements. This paper will explore the synergies between CRM and HAT. We believe that HAT research has much to learn from CRM and that there are benefits to expanding CRM to cover automation.

Crew Resource Management↗

Beyond Point Design: General Pattern to Specific Implementations

We have previously laid out a general framework for Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT) and described how we applied this framework to a specific aeronautic task. In this presentation we demonstrate the applicability of these same principles to two familiar areas, photography and driving directions, focusing on bi-directional communication. We argue that good HAT requires communication of situation variables including operator goals and preferences and threats to meeting them, options including rationale, projected outcomes and confidence, and delegation.

human factors↗

SAM 3.0 Workshop Alliance SV Lab

Nissan is building a Seamless Autonomy Mobility (SAM) which is a cloud-based system of artificial intelligence that manages a fleet of autonomous vehicles. It pairs artificial intelligence with human intelligence in order to create a seamless solution that allows autonomous drive to be viable and marketable. They have created a Mobility Manager function which is a laborer who executed human-in-the-loop functions within SAM system. Nissan invited the HAT Lab to discuss NASA's lessons learned on remote operator support and to participate in a workshop discussion of one of their use cases. This presentation covers some of the HAT Lab's work on a human-autonomy teaming Agent and previous Reduced Crew Operations ground station development.

Human-Autonomy Teaming↗

HAT m:N Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA)

This Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) study was designed to understand the capability of the m:N Tactical Operator (TO) interfaces developed by the Human-Autonomy Teaming Laboratory at NASA Ames to support operators responsible for simplified pilot operations of 100 independently operated small UAS (sUAS) in a constrained geographic area. The m:N sUAS TO interface includes a central Tactical Situation Display (TSD) digital map with moving icons reflecting the sUAS location and planned flight route. The interface also has two side panels. The left panel includes a tabular list of UAS assets and mission tasking, a list of recently viewed assets, and a list of events and alerts. The right panel includes a tabular list of UAS assets and their associated telemetry, text-based chat communication window, and a tabbed checklist window. This CTA was adapted from the incident-based applied cognitive task analysis (Militello & Hutton, 1998) and included demographics questions, scenario-based simulations, a task diagram and knowledge audit methods. In addition to examining the support provided by this m:N sUAS TO interface, this CTA study, conducted with aviation subject matter experts in analogous roles to the future tactical operator, was designed to illuminate and project likely cognitive requirements of the tactical operator. Interviewees participated in two scenario-based simulations using the m:N sUAS TO interfaces. In the first simulation, the interviewees supervised 12 sUAS operating in downtown San Diego, California transiting to and from a central sUAS Hive, restaurant locations, and customer drop off locations. Interviewees were asked to react to a UAS Volume Reservation (UVR) event with a two-phase impact on food delivery operations. In the second scenario, the interviewees supervised 100 sUAS operating in the same airspace and with the same mission. Interviewees used the interfaces to recognize and react to two sUAS air vehicle problems. After each scenario, we asked the interviewees a semi-structured list of questions to elicit their reflections about using the interfaces. Interviewees were confident in their ability to respond to two off-nominal situations in each simulation. Interviewees felt that, given high levels of automation on the sUAS, they would be able to manage the events without requiring additional support or handing off the sUAS to a colleague or supervisor in both the n=12 or n=100 sUAS settings. In the n=12 sUAS condition, interviewees used the center map to understand the asset location and progress along with mission tasking. An additional display window, Asset Telemetry, helped interviewees understand battery state and sUAS altitude. When the number of sUAS increased, interviewees altered their behavior. Rather than maintaining awareness of individual assets, interviewees appeared to become more reactive, managing exceptions. Interviewees reported that they spent less time looking at the nominal aircraft, and focused their attention primarily on the off-nominal aircraft. In addition, in the second simulation with n=100 sUAS, interviewees reported that they relied more on the side panels (Mission Timeline and Asset Telemetry) to gather information.

human-autonomy teaming↗

A Remote Vehicle Operations Center’s Role in Collecting Human Factors Data

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is supporting research to develop a prototype remote vehicle operations center at Langley Research Center to explore current and future advanced air mobility operations using small unmanned aerial systems vehicles as surrogates for future, larger-scale passenger carrying vehicles. Data collected within the Remote Operations for Autonomous Missions (ROAM) Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) Operations Center will be used to explore different roles and responsibilities of remote operators managing multiple autonomous vehicles, with the goal of exploring human-autonomy teaming concepts that enable m:N operations (i.e., m operators managing N vehicles). ROAM has developed into a world-class research, development, and technology (RD&T) environment that can support both the collection of human factors data and the command and control of remote vehicles in beyond visual line of sight conditions. Presented in this paper is an overview of ROAM, with a focus on the design components that support human factors data collection and a review of initial usability results of the facility.

Human factors↗

What Machines Need to Learn to Support Human Problem-Solving

In the development of intelligent systems that interact with humans, there is often confusion between how the system functions with respect to the humans it interacts with and how it interfaces with those humans. The former is a much deeper challenge than the latter it requires a system-level understanding of evolving human roles as well as an understanding of what humans need to know (and when) in order to perform their tasks. This talk will focus on some of the challenges in getting this right as well as on the type of research and development that results in successful human-autonomy teaming. Brief Bio: Dr. Alonso Vera is Chief of the Human Systems Integration Division at NASA Ames Research Center. His expertise is in human-computer interaction, information systems, artificial intelligence, and computational human performance modeling. He has led the design, development and deployment of mission software systems across NASA robotic and human space flight missions, including Mars Exploration Rovers, Phoenix Mars Lander, ISS, Constellation, and Exploration Systems. Dr. Vera received a Bachelor of Science with First Class Honors from McGill University in 1985 and a Ph.D. from Cornell University in 1991. He went on to a Post-Doctoral Fellowship in the School of Computer Science at Carnegie Mellon University from 1990-93.

intelligent systems↗

Beyond Point Design: General Pattern to Specific Implementations

Elsewhere we have discussed a number of problems typical of highly automated systems and proposed tenets for addressing these problems based on Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT)[1]. We have examined these principles in the context of aviation [2,3]. Here we discuss the generality of these tenets by examining how they might be applied to photography and automotive navigation. While these domains are very different, we find application of our HAT tenets provides a number of opportunities for improving interaction between human operators and automation. We then illustrate how the generalities found across aviation, photography and navigation can be captured in a design pattern.

Lachter, Joel Benjamin↗

Evaluation of Technology Concepts for Traffic Data Management and Relevant Audio for Datalink in Commercial Airline Flight Decks

Datalink is currently operational for departure clearances and in oceanic environments and is currently being tested in high altitude domestic enroute airspace. Interaction with even simple datalink clearances may create more workload for flight crews than the voice system they replace if not carefully designed. Datalink may also introduce additional complexity for flight crews with hundreds of uplink messages now defined for use. Finally, flight crews may lose airspace awareness and operationally relevant information that they normally pickup from Air Traffic Control (ATC) voice communications with other aircraft (i.e., “party-line” transmissions). Once again, automation may be poised to increase workload on the flight deck for incremental benefit. Datalink implementation to support future air traffic management concepts needs to be carefully considered, understanding human communication norms and especially, the change from voice- to text-based communications modality and its effect on pilot workload and situation awareness. Increasingly autonomous systems, where autonomy is designed to support human-autonomy teaming, may be suited to solve these issues. NASA is conducting research and development of increasingly autonomous systems, utilizing machine-learning algorithms seamlessly integrated with humans whereby task performance of the combined system is significantly greater than the individual components. Increasingly autonomous systems offer the potential for significantly improved levels of performance and safety that are superior to either human or automation alone. Two increasingly autonomous systems concepts - a traffic data manager and a conversational co-pilot - were developed to intelligently address the datalink issues in a complex, future state environment with significant levels of traffic. The system was tested for suitability of datalink usage for terminal airspace. The traffic data manager allowed for automated declutter of the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) display. The system determined relevant traffic for display based on machine learning algorithms trained by experienced human pilot behaviors. The conversational co-pilot provided relevant audio air traffic control messages based on context and proximity to ownship. Both systems made use of the connected aircraft concepts to provide intelligent context to determine relevancy above and beyond proximity to ownship. A human-in-the-loop test was conducted in NASA Langley Research Center’s Integration Flight Deck B-737-800 simulator to evaluate the traffic data manager and the conversational co-pilot. Twelve airline crews flew various normal and non-normal procedures and their actions and performance were recorded in response to the procedural events. This paper details the flight crew performance and evaluation during the events.

Etherington, Timothy↗

Effects of Autonomous sUAS Separation Methods on Subjective Workload, Situation Awareness, and Trust

The Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) concept was designed to support autonomous small UAS operations at a large-scale and without direct human intervention. However, human-autonomy interactions will be impacted by situation awareness, workload, and trust in the autonomy. Method: Nine participants monitored live small UAS operations in a representative UTM system during a series of traffic conflict scenarios and then provided subjective responses regarding situation awareness, workload, and trust in the autonomous separation method. The study employed a 3 (Separation Method: Autonomous Sense and Avoid, Geofence, Manual) × 2 (Incursion: High, Medium) within subjects design. Results: Situation awareness ratings for both autonomous separation methods were significantly lower than the manual condition. An interaction indicated differential workload ratings for the Autonomous Sense and Avoid separation ratings. Trust ratings significantly dropped when the Geofencing separation method failed. Conclusion: Subjective responses of remote operators in the UTM system are affected by the vehicle separation methods. Operators’ understanding of decisions made by the autonomous systems onboard the vehicle likely influence this effect

UAS↗

Examining the Changing Roles and Responsibilities of Humans in Envisioned Future In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems

Advances in technology are enabling new concepts of operations that will trans-form aviation including increasingly autonomous capabilities to handle evolving complex dynamic ecosystems like those associated with Advanced Aerial Mobility. A major challenge is how to ensure today’s safety levels are maintained as the system scales for rapid detection and timely mitigation of safety issues. NASA has developed a concept of operation for In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS) that represents a system-of-system perspective on interconnected capabilities needed to proactively reduce risk in complex operational environments where unknown hazards may exist. As a result, NASA research priorities include under-standing how the balance between humans and automation changes in such envisioned systems, which may lead to novel human-machine interaction paradigms and human-autonomy teaming for informed contingency management.

Lawrence Prinzel↗

Thinking outside the box: The human role in increasingly automated aviation systems

Rapid advances in artificial intelligence are enabling automated systems to operate in an increasingly autonomous manner in domains that previously required the involvement of human operators. Examples are rail transport systems, self-driving cars, and warehouse delivery systems. From time to time, such automation encounters operational conditions that fall outside a “competency box” within which the system has been designed to operate. Human operators add resilience because they can see and act outside the competency box of scenarios and environments for which the system was designed. The system’s competencies can be expanded over time with modifications to software, sensors, etc.; however, it is unclear at what point the competency box becomes large enough to safely eliminate the role of the human operator. One area where advanced automation may be applied is Urban Air Mobility (UAM). Current UAM concepts envision fleets of highly automated air vehicles providing on-demand transport for people and goods. A phased development of UAM has been proposed, beginning with on-board pilots and transitioning to a future state where automated vehicles operate with minimal human involvement. Proponents of UAM note that this final state reduces cost as well as eliminating pilot error, identified as a contributing factor in many aircraft accidents. However, eliminating human involvement also risks eliminating their positive contributions to system resilience. Here we examine Concepts of Operation proposed for future UAM systems and explore how humans can best be incorporated to maintain resilience while minimizing cost and risk. A human-autonomy teaming approach is suggested.

Advanced Air Mobility↗

m:N and Human Autonomy Teaming Concepts for High Density Vertiport Operations

This report focuses on the role of the Fleet Manager (FM) and, in particular, the ways in which automation could support their position as they manage multiple aircraft and operators in a highly dynamic, advanced air mobility (e.g., air taxi) environment, specifically "high-density vertiport" (HDV) regions. Similar to terminal area operations for traditional aviation, operations involving HDVs will need to be highly structured while also remaining resilient to the various contingencies that can happen in that environment. The role of the FM is consistent with an “m:N” architecture, where “m” number of operators cooperatively manage “N” number of vehicles (where “N” is always larger than “m”). In such a paradigm it is critical to provide the operator with the tools and information necessary to manage their fleet safely and navigate the known pitfalls with highly automated, complex systems (e.g., brittleness, insufficient situation awareness, skill degradation). As the field of m:N has expanded as an area of study, a set of higher-level automation concepts have emerged—namely “plays,” “working agreements,” and “human-autonomy teaming” (HAT)—that could support operators in this new role.

human autonomy teaming↗

A Remote, Human-in-the-Loop Evaluation of a Multiple-Drone Delivery Operation

Over time, advances in unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) have enabled a shift in the operational paradigm from one operator managing one aircraft to that of multiple operators working together to manage multiple aircraft. This shift has highlighted the need for effective human-autonomy teaming methods to maintain manageable workload levels for operators as well as high standards of system performance and safety. This paper presents a study aimed at evaluating whether automation can help operators manage workload during small UAS (sUAS) package delivery scenarios featuring contingency situations. These contingency situations, resulting from unplanned UAS Volume Reservations (UVRs), required flight path reroutes for multiple aircraft simultaneously. The study manipulated the number of aircraft affected by the UVRs and the level of automation support. The presence of terrain conflicts was also controlled within each scenario. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, subjects were not able to gain direct access to the Ground Control System (GCS). Therefore, the study was conducted using a subject-surrogate paradigm that required subjects to relay commands through a verbal protocol from remote locations outside of the lab to a researcher surrogate who had direct control of the GCS interfaces at the lab location. Results show that the automated support condition was associated with faster reroute response times, more efficient reroute maneuvers, and significantly lower levels of perceived workload than the manual reroute condition. However, the automation support level did not significantly impact pilots’ ability to avoid the UVR successfully; pilots were overwhelmingly capable of avoiding the UVR in all conditions. The presence of terrain conflicts primarily impacted pilot performance by leading to multiple uploads per vehicle, which was not typically required when pilots only needed to maneuver laterally. Although subjects did not have direct control over the GCS, subjective ratings indicate that the displays under test provided them with sufficient information to manage their aircraft and promptly respond to the unplanned UVRs. Overall, the objective and subjective data strongly suggest that the verbal protocol and subject-surrogate paradigm were effective methods for collecting data remotely amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

multi-UAS↗

Reduced Crew Operations Research at NASA Ames Research Center

In 2012, NASA began exploring the feasibility of single pilot reduced crew operations (SPORCO) in the context of scheduled passenger air carrier operations (i.e., Parts 121 and 135). This research was spurred by two trends in aviation research: the trend toward reducing costs and a shortage of pilots. A series of simulations were conducted to develop tools and a concept of operations to support RCO. This slide deck is a summary of the NASA Ames RCO research prepared for an R T team at Airbus. Airbus is considering moving forward with reducing crew during the cruise phase of flight with long-haul flights and is interested in the work we have completed.

reduced crew operations↗

Human Automation Teaming: Lessons Learned and Future Directions

Full autonomy seems to be the goal for system developers in almost every area of the economy. However, as we move from automated systems to autonomous systems, designers have needed to insert humans to oversee automation that has traditionally been brittle or incomplete. This creates its own problems as the operator is usually out of the loop when the automation hands over problems that it cannot handle. To better handle these situations, it has been proposed that we develop human automation teams that have shared goals and objectives to support task performance. This paper will describe an initial model of Human Automation Teaming (HAT) which has three elements: transparency, bi-directional communications, and human-directed execution. Transparency in our model is a method for giving insight into the reasoning behind automated recommendations and actions, bi-directional communication allows the operator to communicate directly with the automation, and finally the automation defers execution to the human. The model was implemented through a number of features on an electronic flight bag (EFB) which are described in the paper. The EFB was installed in a mid-fidelity flight simulator and used by 12 airline pilots to support diversion decisions during off-nominal flight scenarios. Pilots reported that working with the HAT automation made diversion decisions easier and reduced their workload. They also reported that the information provided about diversion airports was similar to what they would receive from ground dispatch, thus making coordination with dispatch easier and less time consuming. These HAT features engender more trust in the automation when appropriate, and less when not, allowing improved supervision of automated functions by flight crews.

Human-Autonomy Teaming↗

m:N ConOps/R&R Remote Simulation

This presentation details the experimental design of an investigation of small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) operations involving multiple vehicle management by a remote operator. The study is part of an ongoing effort to explore multiple vehicle control by multiple operators, i.e., the control of N vehicles by m operators (m:N operations). For this effort, NASA and collaborators have developed prototypes of a concept of operations (ConOps), roles and responsibilities (R&R) for operators and supervisors, and a ground control station (GCS), including software displays and interfaces. Participants in this study acted as the pilot-in-command of twelve aircraft flying pre-approved routes in a simulation of a food delivery operation utilizing sUAS in the San Diego, CA area. Each participant experienced four experimental trials. Twice within the course of each trial, participants were responsible for responding to a sudden, unanticipated, and high-priority contingency: an airspace restriction for sUAS operations known as a UAS Volume Reservation (UVR). Upon issuance of a UVR, pilots were expected to reroute affected vehicles around the airspace. The level of automation (LoA) and workload of the flight rerouting task were varied. The LoA was manipulated by providing reroute suggestions ("auto" condition) for aircraft or by requiring pilots to manually reroute ("manual" condition) affected vehicles. Workload was varied as a function of the number of vehicles affected by the UVR contingencies: 2 vehicles ("low workload" condition) versus 4 vehicles ("high workload" condition). Additionally, some vehicles required pilots to adjust for terrain conflicts while avoiding the UVR region. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person data collection for this study was not possible. Researchers adapted to this circumstance through the development of remote data collection protocol. Participants were able to view adapted GCS displays using the Microsoft Teams teleconferencing platform and responded to events by using a verbal protocol developed for the experiment. Using this protocol, participants provided instructions for actions to a researcher, referred to as the surrogate, to carry out on their behalf. This presentation describes the experiment design, including special details for remote data collection via a subject-surrogate configuration, and concludes with planned data analysis and results to be presented at a later date.

multi-UAS↗