1 / 13

Thrust III HRI Studies for Human Factors and Performance Evaluation

Thrust III HRI Studies for Human Factors and Performance Evaluation. J. A. Adams (Lead – Task A) P. Hinds (Lead – Task B) C. Breazeal J. How N. Roy. MURI 8 Kickoff Meeting 2007. Thrust III: Objective.

deon
Télécharger la présentation

Thrust III HRI Studies for Human Factors and Performance Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Thrust IIIHRI Studies for Human Factors and Performance Evaluation J. A. Adams (Lead – Task A) P. Hinds (Lead – Task B) C. Breazeal J. How N. Roy MURI 8 Kickoff Meeting 2007

  2. Thrust III: Objective • Empirical evaluation of remote human operator and human teammate levels of cognitive-load, situation awareness, trust, and performance related to efficient, flexible, and effective HRI, human-robot team structures, team mental models, and system scalability. MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  3. III.A: Task Objectives • Provide a means of empirically evaluating potential human-robot interaction and visualization options prior to full system and hardware integration. MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  4. III.A Existing Technology • Microsoft Robotics Studio simulation of the MDS robots • Quadrotor simulator MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  5. III.A Existing Evaluation Methods • A number of evaluation methods exist that will be incorporated, as appropriate, for assessing • Usability (e.g. Errors) • Workload (e.g. NASA TLX, Multiple Resources Questionnaire) • Situation Awareness (e.g. SAGAT, SART) • Team coordination (e.g. Observation, Efficiency) • HRI Metrics (e.g. Effectiveness, Fan Out) MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  6. III.A Technical Advances • Quantitative evaluation of visualization interaction alternatives with simulated vehicles. • Permits preliminary evaluation for cognitive limitations, situation awareness, and team performance. • Permits the narrowing of alternatives for future development. MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  7. III.A: Year 1 Milestones/Deliverables • Simulation based evaluations of potential UV specialist, triage officer (division chief), and incident commander. • Visualizations and interactions • Transitions with historical context MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  8. III.A: Year 2+ Milestones/Deliverables • Simulation based evaluations of • triage specific HRI for the UV specialist, triage officer (division chief), and incident commander. • Situation awareness drill down • HAZMAT HRI capabilities. • the integrated HRI visualizations, interactions, drill down, and transition capabilities. MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  9. III.B: Task Objectives • Empirical evaluation of human operator and human team member levels with real hardware. • Assessing cognitive-load, situation awareness, trust, and performance related to efficient, flexible, and effective HRI, human-robot team structures, team mental models, and system scalability. MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  10. III.B Existing Evaluation Methods • Trust • An elusive characteristic to measure in human-robot interaction. • Neither human-human nor trust in automation scales are effective indicators of trust in embodied and mobile robots. MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  11. III.B Technical Advances • Empirical results that advance the state of the art understanding of • trust by humans in robotic systems • teaming between humans and robotic systems • situation awareness and cognitive demands placed on humans • functioning as remote supervisors of robotic and human teams • transitioning between remote operator roles • maintaining common ground among the multiple user levels/roles. • when acting as a peer/teammate with robotic systems MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  12. III.B: Year 1 Milestones/Deliverables • Task specific evaluations of UV specialist, triage officer (division chief), and incident commander. • Visualizations and interactions • Transitions with historical context MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

  13. III.B: Year 2+ Milestones/Deliverables • Year 2: Continued evaluations • triage specific HRI for the UV specialist, triage officer (division chief), and incident commander. • Situation awareness drill down • HAZMAT HRI capabilities. • Peer-to-peer HRI capabilities • Year 2+: • Evaluation of integrated remote HRI visualizations, interactions, drill down, and transition capabilities. • System evaluations of overall and human-robot team performance, trust, and system capabilities. • Evaluations of distributed HRI. MIT-Vanderbilt-Stanford UW-UMASS Amherst

More Related