1 / 15

COP Issues

This report presents actionable recommendations for improving decision-making in complex operational environments. Key strategies include leveraging automated reasoning, minimizing sensor confusion, and utilizing virtual reality for enhanced situational awareness. It emphasizes simplifying systems to support information display and decision-making under stress. The analysis also advocates for the active involvement of politicians, iterative design for usability, and tailoring information presentation to functional needs across tactical, operational, and strategic levels.

doyle
Télécharger la présentation

COP Issues

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. COP Issues Working Group 3 Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  2. Recommendations • Go for 110% solution • Scientists know best • User fewer sensors, less confusion that way • Use automated reasoning, turn commander into supervisor • Make the politicians more active players • Use virtual reality • Use small screens, focus on small picture Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  3. Just Kidding! • Now that we’ve got your attention, here is the real report… Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  4. Generating enhanced reality displays from sensor nets • Denis Gouin • Col. (Ret'd) Tom Johansen • Greg Trafton • Mark Chignell • Morten Grandt • Vincent Tao • Bill Wright • Olivier Peufeilhoux • (Order randomly generated) Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  5. Sensor Issues • Making sure that the sensor data is fused in an intelligent and integrated way; • Verifying that these sensors are managed intelligently; • Grouping related sensor elements into coherent wholes (stories); and • Making sure that the sensors are inter-operable. Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  6. User-Centric Issues • Supporting decision making under stress; • Displaying information in a user-centric manner; and • Using basic Human-Evaluation Usability cycles (iterative designing using repeated cycles of prototyping and user testing). Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  7. Basic Framework • COP task (e.g. targeting, OOTW) involves three main players • Sensors • decision makers • executers. • Create a system that is • as simple as possible • takes in a variety of sensor data • display sensor data intelligently • supports quality decision making. • Provide the commander with an excellent mental picture of what is going on. Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  8. Perceptual Cycle Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  9. COP Task Cycle Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  10. Sensor Management • Ability to manipulate the sensors (e.g., where the location should be in the future) is critical. • Sensor management requires a relatively tight coupling between visualizations of data and of corresponding sensor location. • System should • help the human operator plan the location and movement of sensors • facilitate making the “mental picture” better than reality, but not virtual reality – it should not be a “cartoon view” of the world. Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  11. Improve Decision-Making Under Stress • Provide decision-makers with more (relevant) information so they can be better prepared for various contingencies. • Offload decision-making from a reactive mode on-the-fly to a proactive planning mode • stress is reduced • more time becomes available for dealing with situations and opportunities that could not have been predicted or planned for. • Present predictive information (e.g., possible future simulations, early reasoning support systems, etc.) Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  12. 2D vs. 3D? • Provide decision-makers with a range of displays (2D and 3D) and interaction tools so that they can choose what presentations to use in solving the problems they have. Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  13. Iterative Prototyping and Usability Evaluation Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  14. Conclusions • Satisficing is a better goal than optimizing • because requirements are not fully understood. • Get it out there and see what works. • Visualizations should be flexible, especially for different tasks and different jobs. • Different visualizations may be needed for tactical, operational, and strategic levels. • Smooth transitions between these levels are extremely important, since in many situations the differences between these three levels of operation may be blurred. Working Group 3 COP Analysis

  15. Questions? Working Group 3 COP Analysis

More Related