Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human Readiness Levels”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Human readiness levels and Human Views as tools for user-centered design

The Human Readiness Level (HRL) scale is a simple nine-level scale that brings structure and consistency to the real-world application of user-centered design. It enables multidisciplinary consideration of human-focused elements during the system development process. Use of the standardized set of questions comprising the HRL scale results in a single human readiness number that communicates system readiness for human use. The Human Views (HVs) are part of an architecture framework that provides a repository for human-focused system information that can be used during system development to support the evaluation of HRL levels. Here, this paper illustrates how HRLs and HVs can be used in combination to support user-centered design processes. A real-world example for a U.S. Army software modernization program is described to demonstrate application of HRLs and HVs in the context of user-centered design.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Human Readiness Levels Explained

The Human Readiness Level scale complements and supplements the existing technology readiness level scale to support comprehensive and systematic evaluation of human system aspects throughout a system’s life cycle. The objective is to ensure humans can use a fielded technology or system as intended to support mission operations safely and effectively. This article defines the nine human readiness levels in the scale, explains their meaning, and illustrates their application using a helmet-mounted display example.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2021

Technology Readiness Level as the Foundation of Human Readiness Level

Communication of the maturity of technology through the program/product life cycles helps enhance risk management from the beginning and support decision-making strategies for research, development, and allocation of resources. Currently, many organizations use the technology readiness level (TRL) as a simple metric to indicate the maturity of the technology. This article will discuss the TRL history, define the TRL levels, show how the TRL relates to the technology life cycle, and how the TRL framework contributes to the human readiness level (HRL) structure. Through the TRL advantages and disadvantages, this article will show how the TRL falls short in numerous areas of engineering, including the integration readiness of system/subsystem components and assessment of the readiness of the technology to operate within the human capabilities and limitations. Yet the article also shows how the TRL serves as the foundation for HRL.

George Salazar↗
NASA NTRS2021

Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as the foundation of Human Readiness Level (HRL)

As space programs became more complex, it became evident to NASA that a means of defining a methodological way to evaluate the maturity of technologies for spacecraft design was needed for risk assessment that could affect technical, cost and schedule. NASA first saw that infusing technology intoNASA programs required some means to assess technology maturity like flight readiness for a mission. Hence, a seven-point technology readiness level scale was developed in the mid-70s by a NASA researcher and later formally defined in 1989 (Sadin et al., 1989) that comprised of seven levels (See Table 1). These levels provided a definitive meaning of what complexity a research and technology development program should be followed. NASA recognized the approach as a useful way of an effective assessment of,and communication regarding the maturity of new technologies, using a simplistic figure of merit, the state of maturity of a technology-particularly, critical technology necessary to meet a mission/application objective

George Salazar↗
NASA NTRS2023

Space Trusted Autonomy Readiness Levels

Technology Readiness Levels are a mainstay for organizations that fund, develop, test, acquire, or use technologies. Technology Readiness Levels provide a standardized assessment of a technology’s maturity and enable consistent comparison among technologies. They inform decisions throughout a technology’s development life cycle, from concept, through development, to use. A variety of alternative Readiness Levels have been developed, including Algorithm Readiness Levels, manufacturing Readiness Levels, Human Readiness Levels, Commercialization Readiness Levels, Machine Learning Readiness Levels, and Technology Commitment Levels. However, while Technology Readiness Levels have been increasingly applied to emerging disciplines, there are unique challenges to assessing the rapidly developing capabilities of autonomy. This paper adopts the moniker of Space Trusted Autonomy Readiness Levels to identify a two-dimensional scale of readiness and trust appropriate for the special challenges of assessing autonomy technologies that seek space use. It draws inspiration from other readiness levels’ definitions, and from the rich field of trust and trustworthiness. The Space Trusted Autonomy Readiness Levels were developed by a collaborative Space Trusted Autonomy subgroup, which was created from The Space Science and Technology Partnership Forum between the United States Space Force, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, and the National Reconnaissance Office.

Kerianne L Hobbs↗
DOE OSTI2022

Operator Insights and Usability Evaluation of Machine Learning Assistance for Power Grid Contingency Analysis

Introducing machine learning (ML) assistance into any established process comes with adoption barriers, including entrenched procedures, technological and human readiness levels, human-machine trust, and work culture resistance to change. These barriers are even greater in critical operations such as operating a national or regional power grid, in which both regulatory frameworks and the importance of maintaining reliability levels causes additional resistance to the adoption of new computational support. Developers of future systems and job aides must consider not only technical aspects, but also whether new systems are usable by power system operators. This work presents the methodology and results of a study to evaluate the usability and readiness of a prototype recommender system for power grid contingency analysis. We explore operator cognitive load and evaluate operator performance when solving a collection of scenarios both with and without recommender assistance. We also examine operator trust in the system. We report insights gained on the readiness of the system using a collection of evaluation techniques.

Human-Machine Teaming, Power Systems, usability ev↗
DOE OSTI2023

Human Factors in Discovery Phase of TRLs and HRLs

With rapid growth in technology, there has been a corresponding growth in research focused on the ways that human-machine interactions can be improved. As part of that work, researchers have explored how human expertise can inform technology design and evaluation. For example, interaction with subject matter experts (SMEs) or end users can help to design and enhance a machine. The human factors of technology release can be divided into five steps: discovery, planning, development, evaluation, and deployment. This framework is a higher-level abstraction of the Human Readiness Levels for technology use and adoption (See, et al., 2018). In this exposition, we discuss how human factors methodologies, principles, and practices can be realized in the first phase, Discovery, of the technology development process.

Jefferson, Brett A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applying NASA’s Human Systems Integration Methodology in Implementing Voice-Control of Future Spacecraft Systems

Through the NASA Artemis program, a new era of space exploration will serve to lead humanity towards sustained lunar exploration in preparation for the next giant leap-human exploration of Mars. These crewed spacecraft and habitats will require more automation and autonomy to support these complex missions. Crew size will be small and therefore a more efficient command and control input method is desired. Speech recognition along with visual or auditory feedback is an alternative, providing an extra pair of hands and eyes for the crew. Yet, speech recognition demands a highly integrated development approach to ensure a successful system implementation. To ensure the voice control application is developed correctly will require a Human Systems Integration (HSI) approach. This paper provides an insight into the development of a speech/voice control application for a spacecraft system that encompasses automation and autonomy through an HSI approach. Results of the voice control experiment of the Space Shuttle camera system are provided as lessons learned about using voice control on a spacecraft. Limitations and challenges of the technology are addressed as well as how HSI along with Human Readiness Level can help successfully develop voice control command and control systems.

Systems Engineering↗