1 / 25

Mustapha Mouloua , PhD University of Central Florida

EFFECTS OF ADAPTIVE FUNCTION ALLOCATION ON AUTOMATION-INDUCED MONITORING INEFFICIENCY (COMPLACENCY). Mustapha Mouloua , PhD University of Central Florida. Background.

torn
Télécharger la présentation

Mustapha Mouloua , PhD University of Central Florida

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. EFFECTS OF ADAPTIVE FUNCTION ALLOCATION ON AUTOMATION-INDUCED MONITORING INEFFICIENCY (COMPLACENCY) Mustapha Mouloua, PhD University of Central Florida

  2. Background Since the advent of technology, automated systems have been introduced to make human lives easier - dish washer, laundry machine, & vacuum. In today’s modern world, technology surrounds us from coffee makers to computer systems and robotics. • Automation: • “The execution of a task, function, service, or subtask by a machine agent” • (Mouloua, Hancock, Jones, & Vincenzi, 2008) • Adaptive automation (a.k.a.adaptive function allocation) • Takes human capacity, strengths, and limitations into consideration • Dynamically attuned to operator workload & Automatically provided • Not impart extra workload, impair situation awareness, or deteriorate manual skills • Autonomous when necessary (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2006; Mouloua, Hancock, Jones, & Vincenzi, in press; Parasuraman & Hancock, 2001; Parasuraman, Sheridan, & Wickens, 2000)

  3. Human Performance • Are Machines Better Than Humans? • Machines may perform better than humans on tasks which humans are not as accurate, reliable, or capable of performing • Human Limitations and Performance • Perceptually, cognitively, and physically limited • Humans - Passive monitoring for prolonged periods & rapid change • Increase stress, workload, errors, and reduce safety • Computers - extensive monitoring or the rapid influx of information • Human Experience and expertise - associations and decisions seeming instantly and unconsciously • Computers & Humans - should complement each other in the optimal human-machine system • Human performance: one of the most difficult factors to predict • (Davis & Parasuraman, 1982; Parasuraman, 2000; Parasuraman & Hancock, 2001)

  4. Active (Manual) Control: Performance of a Task by the Human Operator in a Human-Machine System. • Automation: Performance of a Task by an Intelligent Machine in a Human-Machine System. • Static (Fixed or Traditional) Automation: Automation That Affects Tasks in a Consistent Manner. Static Automation, Where it Can be Changed at all, can Only be Engaged or Disengaged by the Human Operator. • Adaptive Automation: (Adaptive Function Allocation): An Approach to Automation in Which the Control of the “Division of Labor” Between Machine Intelligence and the Human Operator is Mutually Shared Between the Human and the Adaptive System.

  5. Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS)Definition of “Complacency” “Self-Satisfaction Which May Result in Non-Vigilance Based on an Unjustified Assumption of Satisfactory System State” • (Billings et al., 1976).

  6. The MAT Battery (Comstock & Arnegard, 1992, NASA LanRC)

  7. Forms of Adaptive Logic • Model-Based Allocation: Adaptive System Changes Function Allocation on the Basis of a Model of Pilot Performance • Performance-Based Allocation: Adaptive System Changes Function Allocation by Comparing Actual (Current) Pilot Performance to Some Criterion

  8. Methods of Adaptive Control • Critical Events Logic (Input-Based Adaptation) • Performance Measurement • Workload Measurement • Error Patterns • Flight Path Deviations • Physiological Measurement • Oculomotor Measures • EEG and ERPS • Heart Rate Measures • Performance Modeling • Optimal Control Theory • Intent Inferencing Models • Multiple Resource Theory • Hybrid Logic • Critical Events + Workload Measurement • Performance Modeling + Physiological Measurement

  9. Research Questions • Is Monitoring of Automation Failures More Efficient With Adaptive Function Allocation? • If so, Which Adaptive Method of Function Allocation is More Beneficial? • Does Repeated Function Allocation Sustain Performance Benefits Over Longer Automation Cycles?

  10. Study 1: Methods and Tasks • Subjects • Eighteen Volunteers Subjects Aged 18-24 Years, Participated. • Flight-Simulation Task • A Revised Version of the Multi-Attributed Task Battery (MAT) Developed by Comstock and Arnegard (1992) Was Used. Three Component Tasks Were Used---Tracking, Fuel Management, and System Monitoring (See Figure).

  11. Results of Study One • Monitoring Performance did not Differ Between the 3 Groups Under Automation (Prior to Function Change of Pre-Allocation) • Adaptive Function Allocation Improved Monitoring Performance in Subsequent Blocks Following Return to Automation Control (Post-Allocation) • Performance Benefits Were Similar for Both Methods of Function Allocation (64% and 68%) • Performance Benefit Declined About 10% With Time Following Return to Automatic Control

  12. Study TwoMethods and Tasks • Subjects • Six Volunteer Subjects Aged 19-34 Years, Participated in this study. • Flight-Simulation Task • The Same Flight Simulation (MAT) Task From the First Study Was Used.

  13. General Conclusions • Monitoring Inefficiency Represents the Performance Costs of Static Automation (Can be Seen After 20 Min. of “Static” Automation Control). • Adaptive Allocation to Manual Control for a Brief Period (10 Min.) Enhances Operator’s Performance Under Automation. • Both Model-Based and Performance-Based Adaptation Show Similar Benefits.

  14. Choosing Between the Two Methods Should be Based on Perceived Workload or Subject’s Preferences • The Performance Benefits Can Be Sustained Over Longer Automation Periods. • These Results Are the First Empirical Evidence of the Efficacy of Adaptive Function Allocation ( In This Case Monitoring of Automation Failures) As Opposed to Previous Either Theoretical of Anecdotal Reports.

  15. Future Directions • Does Adaptive Automation Reduce all Costs of Static Automation? • Operator Versus System Control of Allocation Decisions • Effects of Task Allocation Versus Task Partitioning • Workload-Based Adaptation Effects on Monitoring Efficiency • What are the Relative Costs and Benefits of Other Classes of Adaptive Logic?

More Related