RADAR: automated task planning for proactive decision support

ABSTRACT Proactive Decision Support aims at improving the decision making experience of human decision-makers by enhancing the quality of the decisions and the ease of making them. Given that AI techniques are efficient in searching over a potentially large solution space (of decision) and finding good solutions, it can be used for human-in-the-loop scenarios such as disaster response that demand naturalistic decision making. A human decision-maker, in such scenarios, may experience high-cognitive overload leading to a loss of situational awareness. In this paper, we propose the use of automated task-planning techniques coupled with design principles laid out in the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) community for developing a proactive decision support system. To this extent, we highlight the capabilities of such a system RADAR and briefly, describe how automated planning techniques help us in providing the varying degrees of assistance. To evaluate the effectiveness of the different capabilities, we conduct ablation studies with human subjects on a synthetic environment for making an interactive plan of study. We found that planning techniques like plan validation and suggestions help to reduce planning time (objective metrics) and improves user satisfaction (subjective metrics) compared to expert human planners without any support.

[1]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Refining Incomplete Planning Domain Models Through Plan Traces , 2013, IJCAI.

[2]  Jonathan Grudin,et al.  AI and HCI: Two Fields Divided by a Common Focus , 2009, AI Mag..

[3]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Intelligent software agents vs. user-controlled direct manipulation: a debate , 1997, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[4]  Jörg Hoffmann,et al.  Ordered Landmarks in Planning , 2004, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[5]  Julie A. Shah,et al.  Decision-making authority, team efficiency and human worker satisfaction in mixed human–robot teams , 2015, Auton. Robots.

[6]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  Coming up With Good Excuses: What to do When no Plan Can be Found , 2010, Cognitive Robotics.

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

[8]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Direct manipulation vs. interface agents , 1997, INTR.

[9]  Joel S. Warm,et al.  Vigilance Requires Hard Mental Work and Is Stressful , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[10]  Yu Zhang,et al.  Automated Planning for Peer-to-peer Teaming and its Evaluation in Remote Human-Robot Interaction , 2015, HRI.

[11]  Sailik Sengupta,et al.  RADAR - A Proactive Decision Support System for Human-in-the-Loop Planning , 2017, AAAI Fall Symposia.

[12]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[13]  Daniel Bryce,et al.  Maintaining Evolving Domain Models , 2016, IJCAI.

[14]  John L. Humm,et al.  Tumor Treatment Response Based on Visual and Quantitative Changes in Global Tumor Glycolysis Using PET-FDG Imaging. The Visual Response Score and the Change in Total Lesion Glycolysis. , 1999, Clinical positron imaging : official journal of the Institute for Clinical P.E.T.

[15]  Malte Helmert,et al.  The Fast Downward Planning System , 2006, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[16]  Kathryn B. Laskey,et al.  High-Level Fusion for Crisis Response Planning , 2016 .

[17]  Mark H. Chignell,et al.  Mental workload dynamics in adaptive interface design , 1988, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[18]  David E. Smith Planning as an Iterative Process , 2012, AAAI.

[19]  Stephanie Rosenthal,et al.  Dynamic generation and refinement of robot verbalization , 2016, 2016 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN).

[20]  Julie A. Jacko,et al.  Contextual Control Modes During an Airline Rescheduling Task , 2007 .

[21]  R Parasuraman,et al.  Designing automation for human use: empirical studies and quantitative models , 2000, Ergonomics.

[22]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration , 2010, Hum. Factors.

[23]  Andreas Herzig,et al.  On the revision of planning tasks , 2014, ECAI.

[24]  Gary Klein,et al.  Naturalistic Decision Making , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[25]  J. Dessalles,et al.  Arguing, reasoning, and the interpersonal (cultural) functions of human consciousness , 2011, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[26]  Maria Fox,et al.  Validating Plans in the Context of Processes and Exogenous Events , 2005, AAAI.

[27]  Pascal Poupart,et al.  Automatically Generated Explanations for Markov Decision Processes , 2012 .

[28]  Pat Langley,et al.  User modeling in adaptive interfaces , 1999 .

[29]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Human-Automation Interaction , 2005 .

[30]  Yu Zhang,et al.  Plan explicability and predictability for robot task planning , 2015, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

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

[32]  Yu Zhang,et al.  Plan Explanations as Model Reconciliation: Moving Beyond Explanation as Soliloquy , 2017, IJCAI.

[33]  Hector Geffner,et al.  Plan Recognition as Planning , 2009, IJCAI.

[34]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  Generating diverse plans to handle unknown and partially known user preferences , 2012, Artif. Intell..

[35]  Ari K. Jónsson,et al.  MAPGEN: Mixed-Initiative Planning and Scheduling for the Mars Exploration Rover Mission , 2004, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[36]  Jorge A. Baier,et al.  Preferred Explanations: Theory and Generation via Planning , 2011, AAAI.

[37]  Yu Zhang,et al.  A human factors analysis of proactive support in human-robot teaming , 2015, 2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS).