Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Human computer interaction (HCI)”

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
NASA NTRS2013

Evidence Report: Risk of Inadequate Human-Computer Interaction

Human-computer interaction (HCI) encompasses all the methods by which humans and computer-based systems communicate, share information, and accomplish tasks. When HCI is poorly designed, crews have difficulty entering, navigating, accessing, and understanding information. HCI has rarely been studied in an operational spaceflight context, and detailed performance data that would support evaluation of HCI have not been collected; thus, we draw much of our evidence from post-spaceflight crew comments, and from other safety-critical domains like ground-based power plants, and aviation. Additionally, there is a concern that any potential or real issues to date may have been masked by the fact that crews have near constant access to ground controllers, who monitor for errors, correct mistakes, and provide additional information needed to complete tasks. We do not know what types of HCI issues might arise without this "safety net". Exploration missions will test this concern, as crews may be operating autonomously due to communication delays and blackouts. Crew survival will be heavily dependent on available electronic information for just-in-time training, procedure execution, and vehicle or system maintenance; hence, the criticality of the Risk of Inadequate HCI. Future work must focus on identifying the most important contributing risk factors, evaluating their contribution to the overall risk, and developing appropriate mitigations. The Risk of Inadequate HCI includes eight core contributing factors based on the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS): (1) Requirements, policies, and design processes, (2) Information resources and support, (3) Allocation of attention, (4) Cognitive overload, (5) Environmentally induced perceptual changes, (6) Misperception and misinterpretation of displayed information, (7) Spatial disorientation, and (8) Displays and controls.

Kritina Holden↗
NASA NTRS2017

Object and Facial Recognition in Augmented and Virtual Reality: Investigation into Software, Hardware and Potential Uses

As augmented and virtual reality grows in popularity, and more researchers focus on its development, other fields of technology have grown in the hopes of integrating with the up-and-coming hardware currently on the market. Namely, there has been a focus on how to make an intuitive, hands-free human-computer interaction (HCI) utilizing AR and VR that allows users to control their technology with little to no physical interaction with hardware. Computer vision, which is utilized in devices such as the Microsoft Kinect, webcams and other similar hardware has shown potential in assisting with the development of a HCI system that requires next to no human interaction with computing hardware and software. Object and facial recognition are two subsets of computer vision, both of which can be applied to HCI systems in the fields of medicine, security, industrial development and other similar areas.

object recognition↗
NASA NTRS1993

Cognitive engineering models: A prerequisite to the design of human-computer interaction in complex dynamic systems

This chapter examines a class of human-computer interaction applications, specifically the design of human-computer interaction for the operators of complex systems. Such systems include space systems (e.g., manned systems such as the Shuttle or space station, and unmanned systems such as NASA scientific satellites), aviation systems (e.g., the flight deck of 'glass cockpit' airplanes or air traffic control) and industrial systems (e.g., power plants, telephone networks, and sophisticated, e.g., 'lights out,' manufacturing facilities). The main body of human-computer interaction (HCI) research complements but does not directly address the primary issues involved in human-computer interaction design for operators of complex systems. Interfaces to complex systems are somewhat special. The 'user' in such systems - i.e., the human operator responsible for safe and effective system operation - is highly skilled, someone who in human-machine systems engineering is sometimes characterized as 'well trained, well motivated'. The 'job' or task context is paramount and, thus, human-computer interaction is subordinate to human job interaction. The design of human interaction with complex systems, i.e., the design of human job interaction, is sometimes called cognitive engineering.

Mitchell, Christine M.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Human-Computer Interaction with Medical Decisions Support Systems

Decision Support Systems (DSSs) have been available to medical diagnosticians for some time, yet their acceptance and use have not increased with advances in technology and availability of DSS tools. Medical DSSs will be necessary on future long duration space missions, because access to medical resources and personnel will be limited. Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) experts at NASA's Human Factors and Ergonomics Laboratory (HFEL) have been working toward understanding how humans use DSSs, with the goal of being able to identify and solve the problems associated with these systems. Work to date consists of identification of HCI research areas, development of a decision making model, and completion of two experiments dealing with 'anchoring'. Anchoring is a phenomenon in which the decision maker latches on to a starting point and does not make sufficient adjustments when new data are presented. HFEL personnel have replicated a well-known anchoring experiment and have investigated the effects of user level of knowledge. Future work includes further experimentation on level of knowledge, confidence in the source of information and sequential decision making.

Adolf, Jurine A.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Preliminary Design of an 'Autonomous Medical Response Agent' Interface Prototype for Long Duration Spaceflight

Major challenges for astronauts in future long-duration exploration missions (LDEMs) will be that crewmembers are not expected to be medical professionals, may be under high workload and stress, are facing physiological challenges caused by spaceflight, and will have limited, delayed voice communications with medical support from Earth. An autonomous medical response agent (AMRA) is envisioned to help astronauts address medical complaints, develop a differential diagnosis, and guide self-treatment until a healthy state is restored. AMRA develops a process of personalized diagnosis and treatment through a Bayesian predictive control system that recommends therapeutic control actions including diagnostic tests and treatments to crewmembers (Menon, 2020). The Human Computer Interaction (HCI) lab from NASA Ames Research Center’s Human Systems Integration Division (Code TH) has collaborated with Nahlia Inc in human-centered design augmentation research for AMRA. The project, titled Design of ‘Autonomous Medical Response Agent Interface Prototype for Long Duration Spaceflight, has been funded by the Translational Research Institute for Space Health (TRISH) and introduces an interactive user-interface prototype that guides astronauts through self-diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation while communicating with remote specialists in ground support (most notably a patient’s flight surgeon). Our project develops the interaction design for the crewmember using AMRA through user research, iterative design, and usability testing to evaluate the user interface and workflow designed. The interface design deliverable for this project, titled AMRA Aggregate Information Display (AMRA AID) is an integrated information display system for comprehensive autonomous medical guidance, diagnosis, and treatment of in-flight medical conditions experienced by crewmembers. AMRA AID demonstrates how we might ensure crew autonomy, increase the crew’s medical capabilities, and decrease cognitive burden within a front-end user interface. AMRA AID refrains from relying on input from ground or mission control for self-treatment of medical issues—though ground awareness and communication with ground is maintained as a means of ensuring trust between mission control and crew. AMRA AID demonstrates how the crew’s on-board medical system might integrate with information from vehicle monitoring and crew schedule, without assuming causal relationships. AMRA AID’s comprehensive view enables efficient information access for both crew and ground support, reducing cognitive burden in the event of an unplanned or emergency medical incident and enabling informed analytical decisions to be made based on both crew and vehicle health. Human-centered design augmentation advanced within the prototype included: enhanced workflow and treatment guidance for two medical scenarios for a non-specialist user base with various levels of medical training, interaction design which considered speech (conversational user interface) elements and on-screen interactions to be developed in future iterations of the project, communication design and functional requirements relevant to self-care versus caring for another astronaut, as well as user testing of the prototype with an international space medical community. This project arrives at critical findings regarding usability needs, communication requirements, and integrated information requirements for a future technology interface functioning to increase confidence between ground support and LDEM crewmembers.

TRISH↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Promoting Astronaut Autonomy in Human Spaceflight Missions

Mission operations will have to adapt for long duration, long distance human spaceflight missions. This change is driven mainly by the significantly different communication availability between Earth and space. As astronauts travel farther from Earth, the one-way communication latency increases; the amount of bandwidth will be limited; and there will be period of long and/or no communication. Currently, ground flight controllers collaborate and cooperate with astronauts in space to accomplish essential operational functions. Astronaut autonomy, i.e., the crew’s ability to work more independently from mission control, will be a key enabler in future exploration missions. Over the last several years, the NASA Ames Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Group has investigated various ways to promote and support astronaut autonomy in human spaceflight missions. Software prototypes are researched, designed, implemented, and assessed for their ability to enable astronaut autonomy. From integrated Internet of Thing for Space, advanced procedures interfaces, comm-delayed chats, and self-scheduling tools, the HCI Group has explored different aspects of astronaut autonomy. Specifically, the self-scheduling tool Playbook has been evaluated in analog extreme environments and onboard the International Space Station, successfully paving the way for future autonomous astronauts.

crew autonomy↗
NASA NTRS1992

Design for interaction between humans and intelligent systems during real-time fault management

Initial results are reported to provide guidance and assistance for designers of intelligent systems and their human interfaces. The objective is to achieve more effective human-computer interaction (HCI) for real time fault management support systems. Studies of the development of intelligent fault management systems within NASA have resulted in a new perspective of the user. If the user is viewed as one of the subsystems in a heterogeneous, distributed system, system design becomes the design of a flexible architecture for accomplishing system tasks with both human and computer agents. HCI requirements and design should be distinguished from user interface (displays and controls) requirements and design. Effective HCI design for multi-agent systems requires explicit identification of activities and information that support coordination and communication between agents. The effects are characterized of HCI design on overall system design and approaches are identified to addressing HCI requirements in system design. The results include definition of (1) guidance based on information level requirements analysis of HCI, (2) high level requirements for a design methodology that integrates the HCI perspective into system design, and (3) requirements for embedding HCI design tools into intelligent system development environments.

Malin, Jane T.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Increased User Satisfaction Through an Improved Message System

With all of the enhancements in software methodology and testing, there is no guarantee that software can be delivered such that no user errors occur, How to handle these errors when they occur has become a major research topic within human-computer interaction (HCI). Users of the Multimission Spacecraft Analysis Subsystem(MSAS) at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), a system of X and motif graphical user interfaces for analyzing spacecraft data, complained about the lack of information about the error cause and have suggested that recovery actions be included in the system error messages...The system was evaluated through usability surveys and was shown to be successful.

Human-computer interaction error handling direct m↗
NASA NTRS2015

2015 Space Human Factors Engineering Standing Review Panel

The 2015 Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) met for a site visit in Houston, TX on December 2 - 3, 2015. The SRP reviewed the updated research plans for the Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI Risk), the Risk of Inadequate Human-Computer Interaction (HCI Risk), and the Risk of Inadequate Mission, Process and Task Design (MPTask Risk). The SRP also received a status update on the Risk of Incompatible Vehicle/Habitat Design (Hab Risk) and the Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies (Train Risk). The SRP is pleased with the progress and responsiveness of the SHFE team. The presentations were much improved this year. The SRP is also pleased with the human-centered design approach. Below are some of the more extensive comments from the SRP. We have also made comments in each section concerning gaps/tasks in each. The comments below reflect more significant changes that impact more than just one particular section.

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2017

The NASA Augmented/Virtual Reality Lab: The State of the Art at KSC

The NASA Augmented Virtual Reality (AVR) Lab at Kennedy Space Center is dedicated to the investigation of Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) technologies, with the goal of determining potential uses of these technologies as human-computer interaction (HCI) devices in an aerospace engineering context. Begun in 2012, the AVR Lab has concentrated on commercially available AR and VR devices that are gaining in popularity and use in a number of fields such as gaming, training, and telepresence. We are working with such devices as the Microsoft Kinect, the Oculus Rift, the Leap Motion, the HTC Vive, motion capture systems, and the Microsoft Hololens. The focus of our work has been on human interaction with the virtual environment, which in turn acts as a communications bridge to remote physical devices and environments which the operator cannot or should not control or experience directly. Particularly in reference to dealing with spacecraft and the oftentimes hazardous environments they inhabit, it is our hope that AR and VR technologies can be utilized to increase human safety and mission success by physically removing humans from those hazardous environments while virtually putting them right in the middle of those environments.

Little, William↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Interface Consistency: Phase I Results & Phase II Status

Future exploration missions will rely on designing and developing vehicles and complex systems from within NASA and through multiple external commercial partners to meet mission goals. Despite existing consistency-related agency requirements, NASA’s approach to commercial spaceflight development encourages providers’ flexibility and innovation. This strategy is resulting in significant design diversity across Artemis vehicles. Design best practices and guidelines champion interface consistency to promote mental model development and knowledge transfer. However, research investigating the benefits of consistency is mixed, and little is known about its role in complex systems. Determining the level of risk that system diversity presents is difficult, as there is no established method for quantifying the degree of consistency within and across interfaces, nor is there information about the differential impacts of different types of inconsistency. Phase I of this project (Characterization and Measurement) served as a starting point to better understand the construct of consistency, its application, and the range of studies and methods for measuring it. The project team created a taxonomy of consistency to apply to interfaces as a framework to guide the development of tools to assess intersystem consistency. Checklist and cognitive walkthrough methods were developed for use by human factors (HF) and human-computer interaction (HCI) experts. The Intersystem Consistency Scale (ICS) was developed for interface evaluations with crew. A pilot study evaluated the methods’ ability to distinguish differences between Artemis-like prototype pairs exhibiting either high or low design consistency. In addition, click errors and time on task were collected within the ICS (crew-like) group. Results from our exploratory analysis and lessons learned from the pilot study will be discussed. The project team will also present the status of Phase II (Risk Assessment, Standards and Guidelines). This includes incorporating feedback to redesign the assessment tools, and inputs from displays and training Subject Matter Experts to update tasks and prototype designs. The team will present the risk assessment study design to identify the types and levels of inconsistency that pose the greatest risk to performance. Plans to apply these results toward agency standards and guideline recommendations will also be discussed.

Human-Computer Interaction↗
NASA NTRS2017

Playbook Data Analysis Tool: Collecting Interaction Data from Extremely Remote Users

Typically, user tests for software tools are conducted in person. At NASA, the users may be located at the bottom of the ocean in a pressurized habitat, above the atmosphere in the International Space Station, or in an isolated capsule on a simulated asteroid mission. The Playbook Data Analysis Tool (P-DAT) is a human-computer interaction (HCI) evaluation tool that the NASA Ames HCI Group has developed to record user interactions with Playbook, the group's existing planning-and-execution software application. Once the remotely collected user interaction data makes its way back to Earth, researchers can use P-DAT for in-depth analysis. Since a critical component of the Playbook project is to understand how to develop more intuitive software tools for astronauts to plan in space, P-DAT helps guide us in the development of additional easy-to-use features for Playbook, informing the design of future crew autonomy tools.P-DAT has demonstrated the capability of discreetly capturing usability data in amanner that is transparent to Playbook’s end-users. In our experience, P-DAT data hasalready shown its utility, revealing potential usability patterns, helping diagnose softwarebugs, and identifying metrics and events that are pertinent to Playbook usage aswell as spaceflight operations. As we continue to develop this analysis tool, P-DATmay yet provide a method for long-duration, unobtrusive human performance collectionand evaluation for mission controllers back on Earth and researchers investigatingthe effects and mitigations related to future human spaceflight performance.

in-flight monitoring↗
NASA NTRS1991

Making intelligent systems team players: Case studies and design issues. Volume 1: Human-computer interaction design

Initial results are reported from a multi-year, interdisciplinary effort to provide guidance and assistance for designers of intelligent systems and their user interfaces. The objective is to achieve more effective human-computer interaction (HCI) for systems with real time fault management capabilities. Intelligent fault management systems within the NASA were evaluated for insight into the design of systems with complex HCI. Preliminary results include: (1) a description of real time fault management in aerospace domains; (2) recommendations and examples for improving intelligent systems design and user interface design; (3) identification of issues requiring further research; and (4) recommendations for a development methodology integrating HCI design into intelligent system design.

Malin, Jane T.↗
NASA NTRS2014

2014 Space Human Factors Engineering Standing Review Panel

The 2014 Space Human Factors Engineering (SHFE) Standing Review Panel (from here on referred to as the SRP) participated in a WebEx/teleconference with members of the Space Human Factors and Habitability (SHFH) Element, representatives from the Human Research Program (HRP), the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI), and NASA Headquarters on November 17, 2014 (list of participants is in Section XI of this report). The SRP reviewed the updated research plans for the Risk of Incompatible Vehicle/Habitat Design (HAB Risk) and the Risk of Performance Errors Due to Training Deficiencies (Train Risk). The SRP also received a status update on the Risk of Inadequate Critical Task Design (Task Risk), the Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI Risk), and the Risk of Inadequate Human-Computer Interaction (HCI Risk).

Steinberg, Susan↗
NASA NTRS2021

EnDEVR: An Environment for Data Engineering in VR

Organizations within the public and private sectors are looking to improve their data science operations for research, development, and operational purposes. As this interest in data science grows, so too does interest in tools and programs that facilitating such operations. This paper presents EnDEVR, the Environment for Data Engineering in Virtual Reality, a user-extensible system that allows for the execution of custom data science functions. We describe the user-centered design process for the EnDEVR system, based on the needs of subject matter experts within the aerospace and aviation industries. Fundamental to this design is a method for users to integrate their existing analysis code (that may leverage third-party vendors) as usable objects in the virtual environment; this allows organizations to operate without the price tag and lifetime obligations associated with commercial data science toolkits, a concept known as “vendor lock-in”. We then present our system design with iterative implementations, and conclude with lessons learned. The presented work may provide insight into future user-centered design processes for VR applications, particularly for digital transformation stakeholders to circumvent vendor lock-in.

Human-centered computing↗
NASA NTRS1998

Safety Analysis of FMS/CTAS Interactions During Aircraft Arrivals

This grant funded research on human-computer interaction design and analysis techniques, using future ATC environments as a testbed. The basic approach was to model the nominal behavior of both the automated and human procedures and then to apply safety analysis techniques to these models. Our previous modeling language, RSML, had been used to specify the system requirements for TCAS II for the FAA. Using the lessons learned from this experience, we designed a new modeling language that (among other things) incorporates features to assist in designing less error-prone human-computer interactions and interfaces and in detecting potential HCI problems, such as mode confusion. The new language, SpecTRM-RL, uses "intent" abstractions, based on Rasmussen's abstraction hierarchy, and includes both informal (English and graphical) specifications and formal, executable models for specifying various aspects of the system. One of the goals for our language was to highlight the system modes and mode changes to assist in identifying the potential for mode confusion. Three published papers resulted from this research. The first builds on the work of Degani on mode confusion to identify aspects of the system design that could lead to potential hazards. We defined and modeled modes differently than Degani and also defined design criteria for SpecTRM-RL models. Our design criteria include the Degani criteria but extend them to include more potential problems. In a second paper, Leveson and Palmer showed how the criteria for indirect mode transitions could be applied to a mode confusion problem found in several ASRS reports for the MD-88. In addition, we defined a visual task modeling language that can be used by system designers to model human-computer interaction. The visual models can be translated into SpecTRM-RL models, and then the SpecTRM-RL suite of analysis tools can be used to perform formal and informal safety analyses on the task model in isolation or integrated with the rest of the modeled system. We had hoped to be able to apply these modeling languages and analysis tools to a TAP air/ground trajectory negotiation scenario, but the development of the tools took more time than we anticipated.

Nancy G. Leveson↗
NASA NTRS1992

Virtual reality systems

Virtual realities are a type of human-computer interface (HCI) and as such may be understood from a historical perspective. In the earliest era, the computer was a very simple, straightforward machine. Interaction was human manipulation of an inanimate object, little more than the provision of an explicit instruction set to be carried out without deviation. In short, control resided with the user. In the second era of HCI, some level of intelligence and control was imparted to the system to enable a dialogue with the user. Simple context sensitive help systems are early examples, while more sophisticated expert system designs typify this era. Control was shared more equally. In this, the third era of the HCI, the constructed system emulates a particular environment, constructed with rules and knowledge about 'reality'. Control is, in part, outside the realm of the human-computer dialogue. Virtual reality systems are discussed.

Johnson, David W.↗