Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “human-automation interaction”

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 NTRS1991

Acquisition and production of skilled behavior in dynamic decision-making tasks: Modeling strategic behavior in human-automation interaction: Why and aid can (and should) go unused

Advances in computer and control technology offer the opportunity for task-offload aiding in human-machine systems. A task-offload aid (e.g., an autopilot, an intelligent assistant) can be selectively engaged by the human operator to dynamically delegate tasks to an automated system. Successful design and performance prediction in such systems requires knowledge of the factors influencing the strategy the operator develops and uses for managing interaction with the task-offload aid. A model is presented that shows how such strategies can be predicted as a function of three task context properties (frequency and duration of secondary tasks and costs of delaying secondary tasks) and three aid design properties (aid engagement and disengagement times, aid performance relative to human performance). Sensitivity analysis indicates how each of these contextual and design factors affect the optimal aid aid usage strategy and attainable system performance. The model is applied to understanding human-automation interaction in laboratory experiments on human supervisory control behavior. The laboratory task allowed subjects freedom to determine strategies for using an autopilot in a dynamic, multi-task environment. Modeling results suggested that many subjects may indeed have been acting appropriately by not using the autopilot in the way its designers intended. Although autopilot function was technically sound, this aid was not designed with due regard to the overall task context in which it was placed. These results demonstrate the need for additional research on how people may strategically manage their own resources, as well as those provided by automation, in an effort to keep workload and performance at acceptable levels.

Kirlik, Alex↗
NASA NTRS1993

Modeling strategic behavior in human-automation interaction - Why an 'aid' can (and should) go unused

Task-offload aids (e.g., an autopilot, an 'intelligent' assistant) can be selectively engaged by the human operator to dynamically delegate tasks to automation. Introducing such aids eliminates some task demands but creates new ones associated with programming, engaging, and disengaging the aiding device via an interface. The burdens associated with managing automation can sometimes outweigh the potential benefits of automation to improved system performance. Aid design parameters and features of the overall multitask context combine to determine whether or not a task-offload aid will effectively support the operator. A modeling and sensitivity analysis approach is presented that identifies effective strategies for human-automation interaction as a function of three task-context parameters and three aid design parameters. The analysis and modeling approaches provide resources for predicting how a well-adapted operator will use a given task-offload aid, and for specifying aid design features that ensure that automation will provide effective operator support in a multitask environment.

Kirlik, Alex↗
NASA NTRS2002

Formal verification of human-automation interaction

This paper discusses a formal and rigorous approach to the analysis of operator interaction with machines. It addresses the acute problem of detecting design errors in human-machine interaction and focuses on verifying the correctness of the interaction in complex and automated control systems. The paper describes a systematic methodology for evaluating whether the interface provides the necessary information about the machine to enable the operator to perform a specified task successfully and unambiguously. It also addresses the adequacy of information provided to the user via training material (e.g., user manual) about the machine's behavior. The essentials of the methodology, which can be automated and applied to the verification of large systems, are illustrated by several examples and through a case study of pilot interaction with an autopilot aboard a modern commercial aircraft. The expected application of this methodology is an augmentation and enhancement, by formal verification, of human-automation interfaces.

Aviation↗
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 NTRS1996

From Aeronautics to Space: Lessons in Human Automation

Civilian air flight continues on a growth curve, as more and more people utilize air travel to meet business and personal travel needs: This consumer-driven demand has resulted in the adoption of new methods to increase air system capacity and to make the air transportation system increasingly more efficient. As a consequence, civilian aviation, as an industry, has assumed a leading role in the use of automated systems, and, by implication, in the understanding of how human openers interact with these systems. Aeronautical automation systems serve a variety of roles. These include controlling aircraft and aiding, advising and monitoring numerous functions in the aircraft/airspace system. Experiences in the use of human/automation systems gathered from aviation are, in many cases, generalizable to other industries having similar requirements for human and non-human intelligent system interaction. However, the human/automation lessons learned from aviation have special relevance to the space application, where many of the same operational demands prevail. The application of aeronautical lessons of human-automated interaction to spaceflight is the subject of this paper. The discussion will address: the progress that has been made through aeronautically-based research and experience in understanding human/automation interaction, ways that this understanding can be applied to the needs of space, and the limits of our present understanding of human/automations systems. Suggestions will be offered related to human-automation research generally, and to the particular needs of the space endeavor.

Connors, Mary M.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Trustworthiness and Trust: Identifying Factors that Drive Successful Human-AI Interaction in Nuclear Power Plant Applications

Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are rapidly evolving and considered a promising tool for efficient and continued safe operations of the U.S. nuclear power plants (NPPs). Emerging AI techniques like large language models (LLMs) are one such technology that may support personnel at existing NPPs perform work more efficiently. For example, operators may query the current operational status of a power plant via a chat interface leveraging LLMs to access plant-related information in an interactive manner rather than manually collecting various sensor data for tasks such as surveillances or completing work orders. This is a fundamental shift in the way operators currently perform their tasks today. The literature of human-automation interaction indicates that trust is a crucial factor that drives successful interaction between a human operator and an automated system, like an AI-infused NPP application. This work presents the results of a literature review on key factors that relate to trust in AI/LLM technologies for NPP applications. The relevant literature of human factors and cognitive engineering has identified various factors related to trust including trustworthiness, performance characteristics, operator skill and perceived risk. This preliminary literature review will guide development and evaluation of models involving the identified factors influencing trust in AI and develop a framework for human-centered design for interface between humans and AI. By addressing trust, this work supports developing a technical basis for designing key characteristics of AI/LLM to support calibrated trust, which will ultimately support wide-scale adoption of AI/LLM technologies, as well as ensure safe, effective, and reliable use.

99 - GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
NASA NTRS1995

Task Analytic Models to Guide Analysis and Design: Use of the Operator Function Model to Represent Pilot-Autoflight System Mode Problems

Task-analytic models structure essential information about operator interaction with complex systems, in this case pilot interaction with the autoflight system. Such models serve two purposes: (1) they allow researchers and practitioners to understand pilots' actions; and (2) they provide a compact, computational representation needed to design 'intelligent' aids, e.g., displays, assistants, and training systems. This paper demonstrates the use of the operator function model to trace the process of mode engagements while a pilot is controlling an aircraft via the, autoflight system. The operator function model is a normative and nondeterministic model of how a well-trained, well-motivated operator manages multiple concurrent activities for effective real-time control. For each function, the model links the pilot's actions with the required information. Using the operator function model, this paper describes several mode engagement scenarios. These scenarios were observed and documented during a field study that focused on mode engagements and mode transitions during normal line operations. Data including time, ATC clearances, altitude, system states, and active modes and sub-modes, engagement of modes, were recorded during sixty-six flights. Using these data, seven prototypical mode engagement scenarios were extracted. One scenario details the decision of the crew to disengage a fully automatic mode in favor of a semi-automatic mode, and the consequences of this action. Another describes a mode error involving updating aircraft speed following the engagement of a speed submode. Other scenarios detail mode confusion at various phases of the flight. This analysis uses the operator function model to identify three aspects of mode engagement: (1) the progress of pilot-aircraft-autoflight system interaction; (2) control/display information required to perform mode management activities; and (3) the potential cause(s) of mode confusion. The goal of this paper is twofold: (1) to demonstrate the use of the operator functio model methodology to describe pilot-system interaction while engaging modes And monitoring the system, and (2) to initiate a discussion of how task-analytic models might inform design processes. While the operator function model is only one type of task-analytic representation, the hypothesis of this paper is that some type of task analytic structure is a prerequisite for the design of effective human-automation interaction.

Degani, Asaf↗
NASA NTRS1990

Aviation safety/automation program overview

The goal is to provide a technology base leading to improved safety of the national airspace system through the development and integration of human-centered automation technologies for aircraft crews and air traffic controllers. Information on the problems, specific objectives, human-automation interaction, intelligent error-tolerant systems, and air traffic control/cockpit integration is given in viewgraph form.

Morello, Samuel A.↗
NASA NTRS2001

On Abstractions and Simplifications in the Design of Human-Automation Interfaces

This report addresses the design of human-automation interaction from a formal perspective that focuses on the information content of the interface, rather than the design of the graphical user interface. It also addresses the, issue of the information provided to the user (e.g., user-manuals, training material, and all other resources). In this report, we propose a formal procedure for generating interfaces and user-manuals. The procedure is guided by two criteria: First, the interface must be correct, i.e., that with the given interface the user will be able to perform the specified tasks correctly. Second, the interface should be as succinct as possible. The report discusses the underlying concepts and the formal methods for this approach. Several examples are used to illustrate the procedure. The algorithm for constructing interfaces can be automated, and a preliminary software system for its implementation has been developed.

Heymann, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2002

On Abstractions and Simplifications in the Design of Human-Automation Interfaces

This report addresses the design of human-automation interaction from a formal perspective that focuses on the information content of the interface, rather than the design of the graphical user interface. It also addresses the issue of the information provided to the user (e.g., user-manuals, training material, and all other resources). In this report, we propose a formal procedure for generating interfaces and user-manuals. The procedure is guided by two criteria: First, the interface must be correct, that is, with the given interface the user will be able to perform the specified tasks correctly. Second, the interface should be succinct. The report discusses the underlying concepts and the formal methods for this approach. Two examples are used to illustrate the procedure. The algorithm for constructing interfaces can be automated, and a preliminary software system for its implementation has been developed.

Heymann, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2002

Workload-Matched Adaptive Automation Support of Air Traffic Controller Information Processing Stages

Adaptive automation (AA) has been explored as a solution to the problems associated with human-automation interaction in supervisory control environments. However, research has focused on the performance effects of dynamic control allocations of early stage sensory and information acquisition functions. The present research compares the effects of AA to the entire range of information processing stages of human operators, such as air traffic controllers. The results provide evidence that the effectiveness of AA is dependent on the stage of task performance (human-machine system information processing) that is flexibly automated. The results suggest that humans are better able to adapt to AA when applied to lower-level sensory and psychomotor functions, such as information acquisition and action implementation, as compared to AA applied to cognitive (analysis and decision-making) tasks. The results also provide support for the use of AA, as compared to completely manual control. These results are discussed in terms of implications for AA design for aviation.

Kaber, David B.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Hybrid Verification of an Interface for an Automatic Landing

Modern commercial aircraft have extensive automation which helps the pilot by performing computations, obtaining data, and completing procedural tasks. The pilot display must contain enough information so that the pilot can correctly predict the aircraft's behavior, while not overloading the pilot with unnecessary information. Human-automation interaction is currently evaluated through extensive simulation. In this paper, using both hybrid and discrete-event system techniques, we show how one could mathematically verify that an interface contains enough information for the pilot to safely and unambiguously complete a desired maneuver. We first develop a nonlinear, hybrid model for the longitudinal dynamics of a large civil jet aircraft in an autoland/go-around maneuver. We find the largest controlled subset of the aircraft's flight envelope for which we can guarantee both safe landing and safe go-around. We abstract a discrete procedural model using this result, and verify a discrete formulation of the pilot display against it. An interface which fails this verification could result in nondeterministic or unpredictable behavior from the pilot's point of view.

Oishi, Meeko↗
NASA NTRS2003

Team-Centered Perspective for Adaptive Automation Design

Automation represents a very active area of human factors research. The journal, Human Factors, published a special issue on automation in 1985. Since then, hundreds of scientific studies have been published examining the nature of automation and its interaction with human performance. However, despite a dramatic increase in research investigating human factors issues in aviation automation, there remain areas that need further exploration. This NASA Technical Memorandum describes a new area of automation design and research, called adaptive automation. It discusses the concepts and outlines the human factors issues associated with the new method of adaptive function allocation. The primary focus is on human-centered design, and specifically on ensuring that adaptive automation is from a team-centered perspective. The document shows that adaptive automation has many human factors issues common to traditional automation design. Much like the introduction of other new technologies and paradigm shifts, adaptive automation presents an opportunity to remediate current problems but poses new ones for human-automation interaction in aerospace operations. The review here is intended to communicate the philosophical perspective and direction of adaptive automation research conducted under the Aerospace Operations Systems (AOS), Physiological and Psychological Stressors and Factors (PPSF) project.

Prinzel, Lawrence J., III↗
NASA NTRS2003

Three Experiments Examining the Use of Electroencephalogram,Event-Related Potentials, and Heart-Rate Variability for Real-Time Human-Centered Adaptive Automation Design

Adaptive automation represents an advanced form of human-centered automation design. The approach to automation provides for real-time and model-based assessments of human-automation interaction, determines whether the human has entered into a hazardous state of awareness and then modulates the task environment to keep the operator in-the-loop , while maintaining an optimal state of task engagement and mental alertness. Because adaptive automation has not matured, numerous challenges remain, including what the criteria are, for determining when adaptive aiding and adaptive function allocation should take place. Human factors experts in the area have suggested a number of measures including the use of psychophysiology. This NASA Technical Paper reports on three experiments that examined the psychophysiological measures of event-related potentials, electroencephalogram, and heart-rate variability for real-time adaptive automation. The results of the experiments confirm the efficacy of these measures for use in both a developmental and operational role for adaptive automation design. The implications of these results and future directions for psychophysiology and human-centered automation design are discussed.

Prinzel, Lawrence J., III↗
NASA NTRS2006

Application of the H-Mode, a Design and Interaction Concept for Highly Automated Vehicles, to Aircraft

Driven by increased safety, efficiency, and airspace capacity, automation is playing an increasing role in aircraft operations. As aircraft become increasingly able to autonomously respond to a range of situations with performance surpassing human operators, we are compelled to look for new methods that help us understand their use and guide their design using new forms of automation and interaction. We propose a novel design metaphor to aid the conceptualization, design, and operation of highly-automated aircraft. Design metaphors transfer meaning from common experiences to less familiar applications or functions. A notable example is the "Desktop metaphor" for manipulating files on a computer. This paper describes a metaphor for highly automated vehicles known as the H-metaphor and a specific embodiment of the metaphor known as the H-mode as applied to aircraft. The fundamentals of the H-metaphor are reviewed followed by an overview of an exploratory usability study investigating human-automation interaction issues for a simple H-mode implementation. The envisioned application of the H-mode concept to aircraft is then described as are two planned evaluations.

Goodrich, Kenneth H.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Physiological Self-Regulation and Adaptive Automation

Adaptive automation has been proposed as a solution to current problems of human-automation interaction. Past research has shown the potential of this advanced form of automation to enhance pilot engagement and lower cognitive workload. However, there have been concerns voiced regarding issues, such as automation surprises, associated with the use of adaptive automation. This study examined the use of psychophysiological self-regulation training with adaptive automation that may help pilots deal with these problems through the enhancement of cognitive resource management skills. Eighteen participants were assigned to 3 groups (self-regulation training, false feedback, and control) and performed resource management, monitoring, and tracking tasks from the Multiple Attribute Task Battery. The tracking task was cycled between 3 levels of task difficulty (automatic, adaptive aiding, manual) on the basis of the electroencephalogram-derived engagement index. The other two tasks remained in automatic mode that had a single automation failure. Those participants who had received self-regulation training performed significantly better and reported lower National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index scores than participants in the false feedback and control groups. The theoretical and practical implications of these results for adaptive automation are discussed.

Prinzell, Lawrence J.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Constraint and Flight Rule Management for Space Mission Operations

The exploration of space is one of the most fascinating domains to study from a human factors perspective. Like other complex work domains such as aviation (Pritchett and Kim, 2008), air traffic management (Durso and Manning, 2008), health care (Morrow, North, and Wickens, 2006), homeland security (Cooke and Winner, 2008), and vehicle control (Lee, 2006), space exploration is a large-scale sociotechnical work domain characterized by complexity, dynamism, uncertainty, and risk in real-time operational contexts (Perrow, 1999; Woods et al, 1994). Nearly the entire gamut of human factors issues - for example, human-automation interaction (Sheridan and Parasuraman, 2006), telerobotics, display and control design (Smith, Bennett, and Stone, 2006), usability, anthropometry (Chaffin, 2008), biomechanics (Marras and Radwin, 2006), safety engineering, emergency operations, maintenance human factors, situation awareness (Tenney and Pew, 2006), crew resource management (Salas et al., 2006), methods for cognitive work analysis (Bisantz and Roth, 2008) and the like -- are applicable to astronauts, mission control, operational medicine, Space Shuttle manufacturing and assembly operations, and space suit designers as they are in other work domains (e.g., Bloomberg, 2003; Bos et al, 2006; Brooks and Ince, 1992; Casler and Cook, 1999; Jones, 1994; McCurdy et al, 2006; Neerincx et aI., 2006; Olofinboba and Dorneich, 2005; Patterson, Watts-Perotti and Woods, 1999; Patterson and Woods, 2001; Seagull et ai, 2007; Sierhuis, Clancey and Sims, 2002). The human exploration of space also has unique challenges of particular interest to human factors research and practice. This chapter provides an overview of those issues and reports on some of the latest research results as well as the latest challenges still facing the field.

Barreiro, J.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Human Factors in Space Exploration

The exploration of space is one of the most fascinating domains to study from a human factors perspective. Like other complex work domains such as aviation (Pritchett and Kim, 2008), air traffic management (Durso and Manning, 2008), health care (Morrow, North, and Wickens, 2006), homeland security (Cooke and Winner, 2008), and vehicle control (Lee, 2006), space exploration is a large-scale sociotechnical work domain characterized by complexity, dynamism, uncertainty, and risk in real-time operational contexts (Perrow, 1999; Woods et ai, 1994). Nearly the entire gamut of human factors issues - for example, human-automation interaction (Sheridan and Parasuraman, 2006), telerobotics, display and control design (Smith, Bennett, and Stone, 2006), usability, anthropometry (Chaffin, 2008), biomechanics (Marras and Radwin, 2006), safety engineering, emergency operations, maintenance human factors, situation awareness (Tenney and Pew, 2006), crew resource management (Salas et aI., 2006), methods for cognitive work analysis (Bisantz and Roth, 2008) and the like -- are applicable to astronauts, mission control, operational medicine, Space Shuttle manufacturing and assembly operations, and space suit designers as they are in other work domains (e.g., Bloomberg, 2003; Bos et al, 2006; Brooks and Ince, 1992; Casler and Cook, 1999; Jones, 1994; McCurdy et ai, 2006; Neerincx et aI., 2006; Olofinboba and Dorneich, 2005; Patterson, Watts-Perotti and Woods, 1999; Patterson and Woods, 2001; Seagull et ai, 2007; Sierhuis, Clancey and Sims, 2002). The human exploration of space also has unique challenges of particular interest to human factors research and practice. This chapter provides an overview of those issues and reports on sorne of the latest research results as well as the latest challenges still facing the field.

FROM↗