A Human Cognitive Performance Measure Based on Available Options for Adaptive Aiding

Abstract The concept of adaptive automation stipulates dynamically changing levels of automation as solution for the conflict between advantages offered by different static levels of automation. The use of a task performance measure to invoke adaptive automation enables adapting not only to the current situation but additionally to the specific needs of different operators. This paper presents an approach to measure the task performance by comparing the observed interaction behavior with the options available. This takes account of the fact that the achievable result strongly depends on the current situation and the available interaction options. The presented approach is based on a Coloured-Petri-Net (CPN) simulation environment and generates action sequences in the Petri Nets state space which represent the consequences of alternative options. Thus, evaluating operators' actions taking into account the available options becomes possible. This paper further discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed approach regarding its application for adaptive automation. On the one hand, the method is sensitive to the environmental conditions and is able to measure the performance at any time. On the other hand, a drawback of the method is its high computational demand so that it has been used only for retrospective analyses up to now.

[1]  Hendrik Oberheid,et al.  Visual Controller Aids to Support Late Merging Operations for Fuel Efficient and Noise Reduced Approach Procedures , 2009 .

[2]  Linda Onnasch,et al.  Human Performance Consequences of Automated Decision Aids , 2012 .

[3]  Lisanne Bainbridge,et al.  Ironies of automation , 1982, Autom..

[4]  David B. Kaber,et al.  The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task , 2004 .

[5]  David B. Kaber,et al.  Design of Automation for Telerobots and the Effect on Performance, Operator Situation Awareness, and Subjective Workload , 2000 .

[6]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  The Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem and Level of Control in Automation , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[7]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Automation in Future Air Traffic Management: Effects of Decision Aid Reliability on Controller Performance and Mental Workload , 2005, Hum. Factors.

[8]  B. Rouse William,et al.  Adaptive Aiding for Human/Computer Control , 1988 .

[9]  Lars Michael Kristensen,et al.  Coloured Petri Nets and CPN Tools for modelling and validation of concurrent systems , 2007, International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer.

[10]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Stages and Levels of Automation: An Integrated Meta-analysis , 2010 .

[11]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[12]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Adaptive Aiding of Human-Robot Teaming , 2011 .

[13]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  The Application of Human Factors to the Development of Expert Systems for Advanced Cockpits , 1987 .

[14]  M R Endsley,et al.  Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. , 1999, Ergonomics.

[15]  Dirk Söffker,et al.  State-Space-Based Analysis of Human Decision Making in Air Traffic Control , 2009 .

[16]  John E. Deaton,et al.  Theory and Design of Adaptive Automation in Aviation Systems , 1992 .

[17]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Adaptive Automation for Human Supervision of Multiple Uninhabited Vehicles: Effects on Change Detection, Situation Awareness, and Mental Workload , 2009 .

[18]  P. Hancock,et al.  Adaptive control in human-machine systems , 1987 .

[19]  R. Parasuraman,et al.  Psychophysiology and adaptive automation , 1996, Biological Psychology.