Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “latency”

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 NTRS2014

Low-Latency Science Exploration of Planetary Bodies: How ISS Might Be Used as Part of a Low-Latency Analog Campaign for Human Exploration

We suggest that the International Space Station be used to examine the application and validation of low-latency telepresence for surface exploration from space as an alternative, precursor, or potentially as an adjunct to astronaut "boots on the ground." To this end, controlled experiments that build upon and complement ground-based analog field studies will be critical for assessing the effects of different latencies (0 to 500 milliseconds), task complexity, and alternate forms of feedback to the operator. These experiments serve as an example of a pathfinder for NASA's roadmap of missions to Mars with low-latency telerobotic exploration as a precursor to astronaut's landing on the surface to conduct geological tasks.

robotic space exploration↗
NASA NTRS2017

Simulation Based Studies of Low Latency Teleoperations for NASA Exploration Missions

Human exploration of Mars will involve both crewed and robotic systems. Many mission concepts involve the deployment and assembly of mission support assets prior to crew arrival on the surface. Some of these deployment and assembly activities will be performed autonomously while others will be performed using teleoperations. However, significant communications latencies between the Earth and Mars make teleoperations challenging. Alternatively, low latency teleoperations are possible from locations in Mars orbit like Mars' moons Phobos and Deimos. To explore these latency opportunities, NASA is conducting a series of studies to investigate the effects of latency on telerobotic deployment and assembly activities. These studies are being conducted in laboratory environments at NASA's Johnson Space Center (JSC), the Human Exploration Research Analog (HERA) at JSC and the NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) underwater habitat off the coast of Florida. The studies involve two human-in-the-loop interactive simulations developed by the NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team at JSC. The first simulation investigates manipulation related activities while the second simulation investigates mobility related activities. The first simulation provides a simple real-time operator interface with displays and controls for a simulated 6 degree of freedom end effector. The initial version of the simulation uses a simple control mode to decouple the robotic kinematic constraints and a communications delay to model latency effects. This provides the basis for early testing with more detailed manipulation simulations planned for the future. Subjects are tested using five operating latencies that represent teleoperation conditions from local surface operations to orbital operations at Phobos, Deimos and ultimately high Martian orbit. Subject performance is measured and correlated with three distance-to-target zones of interest. Each zone represents a target distance ranging from beyond 10m in Zone 1, through 1 cm to contact in Zone 5 with a step size factor of 10. Collected data consists of both objective simulation data (time, distance, hand controller inputs, velocity) and subjective questionnaire data. The second simulation provides a simple real-time operator interface with displays and control of a simulated surface rover. The rover traverses a synthetic Mars-like terrain and must be maneuvered to avoid obstacles while progressing to its destination. Like the manipulator simulation, subjects are tested using five operating latencies that represent teleoperation conditions from local surface operations to orbital operations at Phobos, Deimos and ultimately high Martian orbit. The rover is also operated at three different traverse speeds to assess the correlation between latency and speed. Collected data consisted of both objective simulation data (time, distance, hand controller inputs, braking) and subjective questionnaire data. These studies are exploring relationships between task complexity, operating speeds, operator efficiencies, and communications latencies for low latency teleoperations in support of human planetary exploration. This paper presents early results from these studies along with the current observations and conclusions. These and planned future studies will help to inform NASA on the potential for low latency teleoperations to support human exploration of Mars and inform the design of robotic systems and exploration missions.

Gernhardt, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Measurement and application of fault latency

The time interval between the occurrence of a fault and the detection of the error caused by the fault is divided by the generation of that error into two parts: fault latency and error latency. Since the moment of error generation is not directly observable, all related works in the literature have dealt with only the sum of fault and error latencies, thereby making the analysis of their separate effects impossible. To remedy this deficiency, (1) a new methodology for indirectly measuring fault latency is presented; the distribution of fault latency is derived from the methodology; and (3) the knowledge of fault latency is applied to the analysis of two important examples. The proposed methodology has been implemented for measuring fault latency in the Fault-Tolerant Multiprocessor (FTMP) at the NASA Airlab. The experimental results show wide variations in the mean fault latencies of different function circuits within FTMP. Also, the measured distributions of fault latency are shown to have monotone hazard rates. Consequently, Gamma and Weibull distributions are selected for the least-squares fit as the distribution of fault latency.

Shin, K. G.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Primary display latency criteria based on flying qualities and performance data

With a pilots' increasing use of visual cue augmentation, much requiring extensive pre-processing, there is a need to establish criteria for new avionics/display design. The timeliness and synchronization of the augmented cues is vital to ensure the performance quality required for precision mission task elements (MTEs) where augmented cues are the primary source of information to the pilot. Processing delays incurred while transforming sensor-supplied flight information into visual cues are unavoidable. Relationships between maximum control system delays and associated flying qualities levels are documented in MIL-F-83300 and MIL-F-8785. While cues representing aircraft status may be just as vital to the pilot as prompt control response for operations in instrument meteorological conditions, presently, there are no specification requirements on avionics system latency. To produce data relating avionics system latency to degradations in flying qualities, the Navy conducted two simulation investigations. During the investigations, flying qualities and performance data were recorded as simulated avionics system latency was varied. Correlated results of the investigation indicates that there is a detrimental impact of latency on flying qualities. Analysis of these results and consideration of key factors influencing their application indicate that: (1) Task performance degrades and pilot workload increases as latency is increased. Inconsistency in task performance increases as latency increases. (2) Latency reduces the probability of achieving Level 1 handling qualities with avionics system latency as low as 70 ms. (3) The data suggest that the achievement of desired performance will be ensured only at display latency values below 120 ms. (4) These data also suggest that avoidance of inadequate performance will be ensured only at display latency values below 150 ms.

Funk, John D., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Latency and User Performance in Virtual Environments and Augmented Reality

System rendering latency has been recognized by senior researchers, such as Professor Fredrick Brooks of UNC (Turing Award 1999), as a major factor limiting the realism and utility of head-referenced displays systems. Latency has been shown to reduce the user's sense of immersion within a virtual environment, disturb user interaction with virtual objects, and to contribute to motion sickness during some simulation tasks. Latency, however, is not just an issue for external display systems since finite nerve conduction rates and variation in transduction times in the human body's sensors also pose problems for latency management within the nervous system. Some of the phenomena arising from the brain's handling of sensory asynchrony due to latency will be discussed as a prelude to consideration of the effects of latency in interactive displays. The causes and consequences of the erroneous movement that appears in displays due to latency will be illustrated with examples of the user performance impact provided by several experiments. These experiments will review the generality of user sensitivity to latency when users judge either object or environment stability. Hardware and signal processing countermeasures will also be discussed. In particular the tuning of a simple extrapolative predictive filter not using a dynamic movement model will be presented. Results show that it is possible to adjust this filter so that the appearance of some latencies may be hidden without the introduction of perceptual artifacts such as overshoot. Several examples of the effects of user performance will be illustrated by three-dimensional tracking and tracing tasks executed in virtual environments. These experiments demonstrate classic phenomena known from work on manual control and show the need for very responsive systems if they are indented to support precise manipulation. The practical benefits of removing interfering latencies from interactive systems will be emphasized with some classic final examples from surgical telerobotics, and human-computer interaction.

Ellis, Stephen R.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Avoiding and tolerating latency in large-scale next-generation shared-memory multiprocessors

A scalable solution to the memory-latency problem is necessary to prevent the large latencies of synchronization and memory operations inherent in large-scale shared-memory multiprocessors from reducing high performance. We distinguish latency avoidance and latency tolerance. Latency is avoided when data is brought to nearby locales for future reference. Latency is tolerated when references are overlapped with other computation. Latency-avoiding locales include: processor registers, data caches used temporally, and nearby memory modules. Tolerating communication latency requires parallelism, allowing the overlap of communication and computation. Latency-tolerating techniques include: vector pipelining, data caches used spatially, prefetching in various forms, and multithreading in various forms. Relaxing the consistency model permits increased use of avoidance and tolerance techniques. Each model is a mapping from the program text to sets of partial orders on program operations; it is a convention about which temporal precedences among program operations are necessary. Information about temporal locality and parallelism constrains the use of avoidance and tolerance techniques. Suitable architectural primitives and compiler technology are required to exploit the increased freedom to reorder and overlap operations in relaxed models.

Probst, David K.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. NASA conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km (distances relevant to LTV-SYS071 and -029 requirements). Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 11.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “first-look” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV↗
NASA NTRS1999

Short-latency primate vestibuloocular responses during translation

Short-lasting, transient head displacements and near target fixation were used to measure the latency and early response gain of vestibularly evoked eye movements during lateral and fore-aft translations in rhesus monkeys. The latency of the horizontal eye movements elicited during lateral motion was 11.9 +/- 5.4 ms. Viewing distance-dependent behavior was seen as early as the beginning of the response profile. For fore-aft motion, latencies were different for forward and backward displacements. Latency averaged 7.1 +/- 9.3 ms during forward motion (same for both eyes) and 12.5 +/- 6.3 ms for the adducting eye (e.g., left eye during right fixation) during backward motion. Latencies during backward motion were significantly longer for the abducting eye (18.9 +/- 9.8 ms). Initial acceleration gains of the two eyes were generally larger than unity but asymmetric. Specifically, gains were consistently larger for abducting than adducting eye movements. The large initial acceleration gains tended to compensate for the response latencies such that the early eye movement response approached, albeit consistently incompletely, that required for maintaining visual acuity during the movement. These short-latency vestibuloocular responses could complement the visually generated optic flow responses that have been shown to exhibit much longer latencies.

Non-NASA Center↗
NASA NTRS2025

Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) Remote Teleoperation Studies Under Four Lunar Communication Latencies

Remotely operating a lunar rover from Earth while subject to an Earth-Moon time delay of multiple seconds could result in a dangerous state where the roving vehicle is either damaged or lost, thereby potentially compromising an entire mission or series of missions. Providing the right capabilities to the remote operator to manage inherent communication latencies will be important for remote driving to be successful. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) conducted two studies to investigate the average speed and number of kilometers per day that an operator on Earth could teleoperate a notional Artemis unpressurized rover with minimal remote operator capabilities under 0- and 4-second communication delays (April 2023 study) and 6- and 8-second delays (August 2023 study). A primary goal of these studies was to understand if an Artemis Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) could cover 6 kilometers (km) in 24 hours when operated remotely. During the April 2023 evaluation, eight test operators used an in-house simulation of the lunar surface South Pole to teleoperate a NASA government reference LTV. Each operator received approximately 30 minutes of remote driving familiarization/training prior to their test run. Operators viewed the surrounding terrain via a single, rover mast-mounted, high-resolution camera with pan/tilt/zoom capabilities; continuous communication was provided throughout all testing. In the August 2023 evaluation, remote operators received approximately 3 hours of familiarization training in each latency, and the simulation environment provided remote operators with an operator-selected rate limiter to enable finer sensitivity in the hand controller and a predictive circle function to better assist operators with predicting the path the vehicle could take. All test operators were able to successfully navigate and drive through six different types of terrain and five planned traverse scenarios using natural lighting under all communication delays. Results for average speeds for each communication delay, computed by averaging the data from all test conditions for that latency and all operators, are shown in the table below. The average speed data was then used to derive the total time needed to cover 6 km, 8 km, and 20 km. Remote operators drove slower and used the brake more frequently when subject to a communication latency as opposed to no communication latency. Subjective workload assessments revealed that while operating in a latency the overall workload significantly increased when compared to a 0-s delay with mental demand, frustration, and performance being the primary contributing factors. Driving strategies in the 0-s delay did not vary significantly among subjects; however, in the 4-s delay condition, three different driving strategies were identified. In the 6-s and 8-s latency conditions the operator’s use of the cruise control to maintain speed was more apparent. Additionally, over the course of the August study, the operator took advantage of the predictive circle indicator on the navigation display and over 95% of the operator’s navigation used the mast camera 180-degree panning function for ground truthing in terms of boulders and craters. Operators started to define more specific parameters in driving strategies for general operations. This consisted of setting the vehicle into a low-speed cruise mode of approximately 1–1.5 kph and noticing driving performance of the vehicle seemed to be much harder at slower speeds 0.4–0.8 kph; however, the vehicle was more responsive at speeds of 2.9–3.6 kph. Regardless of communication delay, operators used both the horizontal translation rails and the vehicle fenders as guides to predict a path for the vehicle through heavily concentrated terrain features. Test operators acknowledged that the teleoperations training for this study was substantially less than what an actual LTV remote operator will ultimately receive. They estimated a minimum of 20 to 100 hours spread across multiple days and weeks (e.g., strategies included immersion training over a 3-day period, to a short 8-week starter program) would be needed to get an operator ~ 60% proficient (i.e., able to complete a subset of remote driving tasks), to a yearlong program for full proficiency in remote driving tasks under all terrain types and natural lighting conditions. Remotely operating a vehicle on another planetary body while subject to communication latency is a complex task. Speed, distance covered, time spent driving, time spent navigating, brake usage and rock contacts are all affected by operator workload, driving strategies, workstation ergonomics and training. These studies provided a “firstlook” answer to a potential system requirement (namely if a remote operator could cover a given distance in a given amount of time); however, considerable general knowledge was gained to begin to understand what it will take to make a successful lunar rover teleoperator.

LTV↗
NASA NTRS1986

Fault and Error Latency Under Real Workload: an Experimental Study

A practical methodology for the study of fault and error latency is demonstrated under a real workload. This is the first study that measures and quantifies the latency under real workload and fills a major gap in the current understanding of workload-failure relationships. The methodology is based on low level data gathered on a VAX 11/780 during the normal workload conditions of the installation. Fault occurrence is simulated on the data, and the error generation and discovery process is reconstructed to determine latency. The analysis proceeds to combine the low level activity data with high level machine performance data to yield a better understanding of the phenomena. A strong relationship exists between latency and workload and that relationship is quantified. The sampling and reconstruction techniques used are also validated. Error latency in the memory where the operating system resides was studied using data on the physical memory access. Fault latency in the paged section of memory was determined using data from physical memory scans. Error latency in the microcontrol store was studied using data on the microcode access and usage.

Chillarege, Ram↗
NASA NTRS1998

The Impact of System Latency on Dynamic Performance In Virtual Acoustic Environments

Engineering constraints that may be encountered when implementing interactive virtual acoustic displays are examined In particular, system parameters such as the update rate and total system latency are defined and the impact they may have on perception is discussed. For example, examination of the head motions that listeners used to aid localization in a previous study suggests that some head motions may be as fast as about 400 degrees/sec for short time periods. Analysis of latencies in virtual acoustic environments (VAEs) suggests that: (1) commonly-specified parameters such as the audio update rate determine only the "best-case" latency possible in a VAE, (2) total system latency and individual latencies of system components, including head-trackers, are frequently not measured by VAE developers, and (3) typical system latencies may result in under-sampling of relative listener-source motion of 400 degrees/sec as well as positional "jitter" in the simulated source. To clearly specify the dynamic performance of a particular VAE, users and developers need to make measurements of average system latency, update rate, and their variability using standardized rendering scenarios. a parameters such as the minimum audible movement angle can then be used as target guidelines to assess whether a given system meets perceptual requirements.

Wenzel, Elizabeth M.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Fault latency in the memory - An experimental study on VAX 11/780

Fault latency is the time between the physical occurrence of a fault and its corruption of data, causing an error. The measure of this time is difficult to obtain because the time of occurrence of a fault and the exact moment of generation of an error are not known. This paper describes an experiment to accurately study the fault latency in the memory subsystem. The experiment employs real memory data from a VAX 11/780 at the University of Illinois. Fault latency distributions are generated for s-a-0 and s-a-1 permanent fault models. Results show that the mean fault latency of a s-a-0 fault is nearly 5 times that of the s-a-1 fault. Large variations in fault latency are found for different regions in memory. An analysis of a variance model to quantify the relative influence of various workload measures on the evaluated latency is also given.

Chillarege, Ram↗
NASA NTRS1993

Handling qualities effects of display latency

Display latency is the time delay between aircraft response and the corresponding response of the cockpit displays. Currently, there is no explicit specification for allowable display lags to ensure acceptable aircraft handling qualities in instrument flight conditions. This paper examines the handling qualities effects of display latency between 70 and 400 milliseconds for precision instrument flight tasks of the V-22 Tiltrotor aircraft. Display delay effects on the pilot control loop are analytically predicted through a second order pilot crossover model of the V-22 lateral axis, and handling qualities trends are evaluated through a series of fixed-base piloted simulation tests. The results show that the effects of display latency for flight path tracking tasks are driven by the stability characteristics of the attitude control loop. The data indicate that the loss of control damping due to latency can be simply predicted from knowledge of the aircraft's stability margins, control system lags, and required control bandwidths. Based on the relationship between attitude control damping and handling qualities ratings, latency design guidelines are presented. In addition, this paper presents a design philosophy, supported by simulation data, for using flight director display augmentation to suppress the effects of display latency for delays up to 300 milliseconds.

King, David W.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Low-Latency Lunar Surface Telerobotics from Earth-Moon Libration Points

Concepts for a long-duration habitat at Earth-Moon LI or L2 have been advanced for a number of purposes. We propose here that such a facility could also have an important role for low-latency telerobotic control of lunar surface equipment, both for lunar science and development. With distances of about 60,000 km from the lunar surface, such sites offer light-time limited two-way control latencies of order 400 ms, making telerobotic control for those sites close to real time as perceived by a human operator. We point out that even for transcontinental teleoperated surgical procedures, which require operational precision and highly dexterous manipulation, control latencies of this order are considered adequate. Terrestrial telerobots that are used routinely for mining and manufacturing also involve control latencies of order several hundred milliseconds. For this reason, an Earth-Moon LI or L2 control node could build on the technology and experience base of commercially proven terrestrial ventures. A lunar libration-point telerobotic node could demonstrate exploration strategies that would eventually be used on Mars, and many other less hospitable destinations in the solar system. Libration-point telepresence for the Moon contrasts with lunar telerobotic control from the Earth, for which two-way control latencies are at least six times longer. For control latencies that long, telerobotic control efforts are of the "move-and-wait" variety, which is cognitively inferior to near real-time control.

Lester, Daniel↗
NASA NTRS2016

Analog Testing of Operations Concepts for Mitigation of Communication Latency During Human Space Exploration

OBJECTIVES: NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is an underwater spaceflight analog that allows a true mission‐like operational environment and uses buoyancy effects and added weight to simulate different gravity levels. Three missions were undertaken from 2014‐2015, NEEMO's 18‐20. All missions were performed at the Aquarius undersea research habitat. During each mission, the effects of varying operations concepts and tasks type and complexity on representative communication latencies associated with Mars missions were studied. METHODS: 12 subjects (4 per mission) were weighed out to simulate near‐zero or partial gravity extravehicular activity (EVA) and evaluated different operations concepts for integration and management of a simulated Earth‐based science backroom team (SBT) to provide input and direction during exploration activities. Exploration traverses were planned in advance based on precursor data collected. Subjects completed science‐related tasks including presampling surveys, geologic‐based sampling, and marine‐based sampling as a portion of their tasks on saturation dives up to 4 hours in duration that were to simulate extravehicular activity (EVA) on Mars or the moons of Mars. One‐way communication latencies, 5 and 10 minutes between space and mission control, were simulated throughout the missions. Objective data included task completion times, total EVA times, crew idle time, translation time, SBT assimilation time (defined as time available for SBT to discuss data/imagery after it has been collected, in addition to the time taken to watch imagery streaming over latency). Subjective data included acceptability, simulation quality, capability assessment ratings, and comments. RESULTS: Precursor data can be used effectively to plan and execute exploration traverse EVAs (plans included detailed location of science sites, high‐fidelity imagery of the sites, and directions to landmarks of interest within a site). Operations concepts that allow for presampling surveys enable efficient traverse execution and meaningful Mission Control Center (MCC) interaction across long communication latencies and can be done with minimal crew idle time. Imagery and information from the EVA crew that is transmitted real‐time to the intravehicular (IV) crewmember(s) can be used to verify that exploration traverse plans are being executed correctly. That same data can be effectively used by MCC (across comm latency) to provide further instructions to the crew from a SBT on sampling priorities, additional tasks, and changes to the plan. Text / data capabilities are preferred over voice capabilities between MCC and IV when executing exploration traverse plans over communication latency. Autonomous crew planning tools can be effective at modifying existing plans if the objectives and constraints are clearly defined.

Chappell, Steven P.↗
NASA NTRS1989

An experimental study of memory fault latency

The difficulty with the measurement of fault latency is due to the lack of observability of the fault occurrence and error generation instants in a production environment. The authors describe an experiment, using data from a VAX 11/780 under real workload, to study fault latency in the memory subsystem accurately. Fault latency distributions are generated for stuck-at-zero (s-a-0) and stuck-at-one (s-a-1) permanent fault models. The results show that the mean fault latency of an s-a-0 fault is nearly five times that of the s-a-1 fault. An analysis of variance is performed to quantify the relative influence of different workload measures on the evaluated latency.

Chillarege, Ram↗
NASA NTRS1997

Eye Movement Latencies to Direction Change for Different Classes of Motion

In the analysis of visual motion, local features such as orientation are analyzed early in the cortical processing stream (V1), while integration across orientation and space is thought to occur in higher cortical areas such as MT, MST, etc. If all areas provide inputs to eye movement control centers, we would expect that local properties would drive eye movements with relatively short latencies, while global properties would require longer latencies. When such latencies are observed, they can provide information about when (and where?) various stimulus properties are analyzed. To this end, a stimulus was employed in which local and global properties determining perceived direction-of-motion could be manipulated independently: an elliptical Gabor patch with a drifting carrier, with variable orientation of the carrier grating and the contrast window. We have previously demonstrated that the directional percepts evoked by this stimulus vary between the "grating direction" (the normal to the grating's orientation) and the "window direction" (ARVO 91, 94), and that similar effects can be observed in reflexive eye movements (ARVO 95). Subjects viewed such a stimulus while attempting to maintain steady fixation on the center of the pattern, and the small reflexive eye movements ("stare OKN") were recorded. In the middle of the trial, the orientation of either the grating or the window was rotated smoothly by 30 degrees. Responses to the shift of both grating orientation and window orientation are seen in the average OKN slow phase velocity. Grating rotations produce a rapid OKN rotation to the grating direction (100 ms latency, 300 ms time constant), followed by a slower rebound to the steady state perceived direction midway between the grating and window directions. Window rotations, on the other hand, evoke a slower response (200 ms latency, 500 ms time constant). The results demonstrate multiple cortical inputs to eye movement control: a taste early input driven by orientation, and a slower input from higher areas sensitive to global stimulus properties.

Mulligan, Jeffrey B.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Latency in Visionic Systems: Test Methods and Requirements

A visionics device creates a pictorial representation of the external scene for the pilot. The ultimate objective of these systems may be to electronically generate a form of Visual Meteorological Conditions (VMC) to eliminate weather or time-of-day as an operational constraint and provide enhancement over actual visual conditions where eye-limiting resolution may be a limiting factor. Empirical evidence has shown that the total system delays or latencies including the imaging sensors and display systems, can critically degrade their utility, usability, and acceptability. Definitions and measurement techniques are offered herein as common test and evaluation methods for latency testing in visionics device applications. Based upon available data, very different latency requirements are indicated based upon the piloting task, the role in which the visionics device is used in this task, and the characteristics of the visionics cockpit display device including its resolution, field-of-regard, and field-of-view. The least stringent latency requirements will involve Head-Up Display (HUD) applications, where the visionics imagery provides situational information as a supplement to symbology guidance and command information. Conversely, the visionics system latency requirement for a large field-of-view Head-Worn Display application, providing a Virtual-VMC capability from which the pilot will derive visual guidance, will be the most stringent, having a value as low as 20 msec.

Bailey, Randall E.↗