Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human-Autonomy Teaming”

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.

72 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Human Factors Research Needs for In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS) Design: Enabling the NASA “Sky for All” Future Airspace Vision

Integrated safety management will be paramount for safely enabling the envisioned transformations of the future National Airspace System. Addressing the increasing need for advanced data analytics and fusion of aviation safety data, managed by human decision-makers, is essential for realizing the vision. The proposal, if accepted, will discuss safety management system challenges and how the concept of In-time Aviation Safety Management Systems addresses the need. It will also discuss human factors challenges involved in future integrated safety management, including trust, over-reliance, human-optimized data visualization, human-autonomy teaming, training, communication and dissemination of data, situation awareness, task load, and accountability.

Lawrence J Prinzel III↗
NASA NTRS2023

Distributed Sensing and Reasoning for Advanced Air Mobility Health Management and Mission Assurance

As envisioned, Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) and Urban Air Mobility (UAM) will introduce new vehicles and operations within the national airspace, moving people and cargo safely and efficiently at a much larger scale than today. Driven by transformative technology and revolutionary aircraft, this movement must still manage technical, regulatory, operational, and policy challenges. NASA’s work in support of AAM and UAM includes, but is not limited to tools, technologies, and architectures for distributed sensing of aircraft, data & reasoning services exchange, Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT), contingency management, and vehicle health management. This paper builds upon these concepts and evaluates the use of distributed sensing and infrastructure assistance towards health management and mission assurance of UAM vehicles in specific operational scenarios. Through analysis of these example missions, aided by the data produced by the conceptual distributed sensing and reasoning infrastructure, we define opportunities for state estimation, diagnosis, and key decision points affecting the health state of the vehicle and the airspace volume. As a result, we define a number of measurable health state parameters providing relevant information to drive decision-making in contingency situations or feed automation tools in support of operators and managers.

Safety↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Development of Multi-Vehicle (m:N) Operations with NASA Langley’s Remote Vehicle Operations Center

To achieve the vision of Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), a transition from localized operations of aircraft to remote operations is being pursued across many use cases. This transition will allow fewer human operators to manage more increasingly autonomous aircraft (i.e., m operators managing N vehicles, or m:N). To study this operational concept, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Langley Research Center (LaRC) has developed a prototype remote vehicle operations center and ground control station (GCS) software to conduct research with simulated and real flight operations. To date, flight operations at LaRC have been limited to one vehicle per operator. However, the current paper describes initial development and considerations for enabling m:N flight operations at LaRC. Further, the research described in this paper provides the foundation for a concept of operations (ConOps) that will be developed to support remote operators managing multiple increasingly autonomous vehicles, with the goal of exploring human-autonomy teaming (HAT) concepts that enable more advanced m:N operations. Two key enablers have been identified to facilitate successful m:N operations: GCS software updates for multi-vehicle management and procedural updates for vehicle handoffs during off-nominal events. Additionally, specific modifications were identified across five key areas: technology and software, team structure, inter-team communication, contingency plans, and operator decision flows. Next steps in forming the LaRC m:N ConOps will include working with subject-matter experts to identify off-nominal scenarios, implementing the recommended GCS functionality for m:N operations, and performing integration testing of facility capabilities and new operational procedures. Although the future m:N ConOps will be tailored to the NASA LaRC remote operations facility and flight range, it is intended to be a transparent, accessible, and reality-based exemplar for external organizations seeking to create or evaluate their own m:N operational concepts.

m:N↗
NASA NTRS2017

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↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

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↗
NASA NTRS2018

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↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Attentional Considerations in Advanced Air Mobility Operations: Control, Manage, or Assist?

The implementation of automation will enable Advanced Air Mobility (AAM), which could alter the hu-man’s responsibilities from those of an active controller to a passive monitor of vehicles. Mature AAM operations will likely rely on both experienced and novice operators to supervise multiple aircraft. As AAM constitutes a complex and increasingly autonomous system, the human operator’s set of responsibilities will transition from those of a controller, to a manager, and eventually to an assistant to highly automated systems. The development of AAM will require system designers to characterize these three sets of human responsibilities. The present work proposes different human responsibilities across various roles (i.e., pilot in command, system operator, system assistant) in the context of AAM along with pertinent attention-related constructs that could contribute to each of the three identified roles of AAM operators including situation awareness, workload, complacency, and vigilance.

Advanced Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Where is the Human in the Loop? Human Factors Analysis of Extended Visual Line of Sight Unmanned Aerial System Operations within a Remote Operations Environment

Many envisioned technological and conceptual innovations focus on allocating more functions to automation, relegating the human as an afterthought if not a nuisance. Yet, until complete autonomy is realized, the human will remain “in the loop”. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is supporting research for the development and maturation of automated technologies and architectures for the future of advanced air mobility. Standing up a remote operations center used to control, manage, and monitor multiple highly automated vehicles is an important step towards realizing the advanced air mobility vision. At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center, a remote operation center exists and has been tested using humans piloting simulated vehicles. In this paper, we explore the human element within live flight operations that rely on increasingly automated technologies. Four ground control station operators performed multiple live flight operations. We employed a naturalistic approach and relied on qualitative data such as interviews and discussions with subject matter experts to help facilitate discovery. The present work evaluates the functions that the human and the automation had during the live operations, lists psychological constructs that may have promoted or reduced task performance, and provides recommendations on design of the remote operations environment and training of future ground control station operators.

Advanced Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Where is the Human in the Loop? Human Factors Analysis of Extended Visual Line of Sight Unmanned Aerial System Operations within a Remote Operations Environment

Many envisioned technological and conceptual innovations focus on allocating more functions to automation, relegating the human as an afterthought if not a nuisance. Yet, until complete autonomy is realized, the human will remain “in the loop”. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is supporting research for the development and maturation of automated technologies and architectures for the future of advanced air mobility. Standing up a remote operations center used to control, manage, and monitor multiple highly automated vehicles is an important step towards realizing the advanced air mobility vision. At the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Langley Research Center, a remote operation center exists and has been tested using humans piloting simulated vehicles. In this paper, we explore the human element within live flight operations that rely on increasingly automated technologies. Four ground control station operators performed multiple live flight operations. We employed a naturalistic approach and relied on qualitative data such as interviews and discussions with subject matter experts to help facilitate discovery. The present work evaluates the functions that the human and the automation had during the live operations, lists psychological constructs that may have promoted or reduced task performance, and provides recommendations on design of the remote operations environment and training of future ground control station operators.

Advanced Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

MPATH (Measuring Performance for Autonomy Teaming with Humans) Ground Control Station: Design Approach and Initial Usability Results

Envisioned future Advanced Air Mobility (AAM) operations will require a transition of aircraft command and control from onboard pilots to remote operators. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has developed a research ground control station (GCS) software called MPATH (Measuring Performance for Autonomy Teaming with Humans) to study the human factors of remote operators in a representative AAM environment, where small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS; simulated or real) act as surrogates for larger AAM aircraft. A primary focus of the research being conducted with the MPATH GCS is scalability (i.e., one human managing multiple vehicles). MPATH has demonstrated to be a useful capability for human factors research and remote operations. Two initial usability studies and a multi-vehicle control assessment were recently conducted, and usability data and operator feedback were collected. Generally, participants rated MPATH high on usability and interface quality, whereas information quality was rated slightly lower. These results were supported by specific feedback. Several generalized GCS design recommendations are proposed based on the results and feedback from these flight activities. Future updates to MPATH will incorporate the proposed recommendations. In practice, these recommendations could be used by any GCS software designer or developer to promote usability and safety.

Advanced Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The Influence of Viability, Independence, and Self-Governance on Trust and Public Acceptance of Uncrewed Air Vehicle Operations

Trust is expected to be a critical construct that drives successful use of advanced air mobility (AAM) technologies. As yet, though, the role of trust in human-autonomy interaction is underexplored. Kaber (2018) argues that autonomy requires the highest level of three independent dimensions -- viability, independence, and self-governance. The present study examined whether trust varies across the three dimensions of autonomy under varying levels of risk. Participants in the high-risk group read a series of vignettes on a drone that delivers medical supplies over a city where the current study was conducted. Participants in the low-risk group read a series of vignettes on a drone that delivers fast food over a fictitious city. Each vignette described a drone that is either autonomous (i.e., possesses all dimensions) or automated (i.e., one of the dimensions is compromised). Results imply that the three dimensions of autonomy do not equally influence human-technology trust and behavior.

Advanced Air Mobility↗
NASA NTRS2023

A Meta-Analytic Approach to Investigating the Relationship Between Human-Automation Trust and Attention Allocation

Trust and attention allocation are pivotal determinants in human-automation interaction. However, there are scarce empirical findings regarding the relationship between trust and attention allocation. Observations from our previous work suggested there may be a negative correlation between trust in automation and eye movement towards automation, though no formal analysis of these data had been conducted to quantify this relationship. The present meta-analysis examined the relationship between three dimensions of trust in automation (performance, process, and purpose) and visual attention allocation to the automation. Specifically, we applied Cumming’s (2014) meta-analysis technique to combine evidence across three experiments. Results indicated a negative correlation between trust in automation and visual sampling of the automated system monitoring task for performance-based trust, but not for process- or purpose-based trust. These findings suggest that operators scanned the automation’s behavior less frequently when indicating higher performance-based trust towards the automation.

Human-Autonomy Teaming (HAT)↗