ALARMS: Alerting and Reasoning Management System for Next Generation Aircraft Hazards

The Next Generation Air Transportation System will introduce new, advanced sensor technologies into the cockpit. With the introduction of such systems, the responsibilities of the pilot are expected to dramatically increase. In the ALARMS (ALerting And Reasoning Management System) project for NASA, we focus on a key challenge of this environment, the quick and efficient handling of aircraft sensor alerts. It is infeasible to alert the pilot on the state of all subsystems at all times. Furthermore, there is uncertainty as to the true hazard state despite the evidence of the alerts, and there is uncertainty as to the effect and duration of actions taken to address these alerts. This paper reports on the first steps in the construction of an application designed to handle Next Generation alerts. In ALARMS, we have identified 60 different aircraft subsystems and 20 different underlying hazards. In this paper, we show how a Bayesian network can be used to derive the state of the underlying hazards, based on the sensor input. Then, we propose a framework whereby an automated system can plan to address these hazards in cooperation with the pilot, using a Time-Dependent Markov Process (TMDP). Different hazards and pilot states will call for different alerting automation plans. We demonstrate this emerging application of Bayesian networks and TMDPs to cockpit automation, for a use case where a small number of hazards are present, and analyze the resulting alerting automation policies.

[1]  Patrick Fabiani,et al.  Adapting an MDP planner to time-dependency: case study on a UAV coordination problem , 2009 .

[2]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Exploiting belief bounds: practical POMDPs for personal assistant agents , 2005, AAMAS '05.

[3]  Lihong Li,et al.  Lazy Approximation for Solving Continuous Finite-Horizon MDPs , 2005, AAAI.

[4]  Michael L. Littman,et al.  Exact Solutions to Time-Dependent MDPs , 2000, NIPS.

[5]  Milind Tambe,et al.  A Fast Analytical Algorithm for Solving Markov Decision Processes with Real-Valued Resources , 2007, IJCAI.

[6]  Scott M. Galster An Examination of Complex Human-Machine System Performance under Multiple Levels and Stages of Automation , 2003 .

[7]  Paul Proctor INTEGRATED COCKPIT SAFETY SYSTEM CERTIFIED , 1998 .

[8]  Zhengzhu Feng,et al.  Dynamic Programming for Structured Continuous Markov Decision Problems , 2004, UAI.

[9]  Mark A. Peot,et al.  Automated Decision-Analytic Diagnosis of Thermal Performance in Gas Turbines , 1992 .

[10]  James K. Kuchar,et al.  Dissonance between multiple alerting systems.I. Modeling and analysis , 2003, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[11]  Marek J. Druzdzel,et al.  SMILE: Structural Modeling, Inference, and Learning Engine and GeNIE: A Development Environment for Graphical Decision-Theoretic Models , 1999, AAAI/IAAI.

[12]  Milind Tambe,et al.  Towards Adjustable Autonomy for the Real World , 2002, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[13]  Milind Tambe,et al.  RIAACT: a robust approach to adjustable autonomy for human-multiagent teams , 2008, AAMAS.

[14]  Todd Jeffrey Callantine Tracking operator activities in complex systems , 1996 .

[15]  Steen Andreassen,et al.  MUNIN - A Causal Probabilistic Network for Interpretation of Electromyographic Findings , 1987, IJCAI.

[16]  Tom Ritzdorf,et al.  Monitoring and Control , 2011 .

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

[18]  A Latorella Kara,et al.  Investigating Interruptions: Implications for Flightdeck Performance , 1999 .

[19]  J. Ebeling Monitoring and control , 1994 .

[20]  Shlomo Zilberstein,et al.  Monitoring and control of anytime algorithms: A dynamic programming approach , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[21]  K. J. Vicente,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work , 1999 .