Mitigation of human supervisory control wait times through automation strategies

The application of network centric operations principles to human supervisory control (HSC) domains means that humans are increasingly being asked to manage multiple simultaneous HSC processes. However, increases in the number of available information sources, volume of information and operational tempo, all which place higher cognitive demands on operators, could become constraints limiting the success of network centric processes. In time-pressured scenarios typical of networked command and control scenarios, efficiently allocating attention between a set of dynamic tasks is crucial for mission success. Inefficient attention allocation leads to system wait times, which could eventually lead to critical events such as missed times on targets and degraded overall mission success. One potential solution to mitigating wait times is the introduction of automated decision support in order to relieve operator workload. However, it is not obvious what automated decision support is appropriate, as higher levels of automation may result in a situation awareness decrement and other problems typically associated with excessive automation such as automation bias. To assess the impact of increasing levels of automation on human and system performance in a time-critical HSC multiple task management context, an experiment was run in which an operator simultaneously managed four highly autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles executing an air tasking order, with the overall goal of destroying a pre-determined set of targets within a limited time period. A 4x2(3) repeated measures design was utilized in which the level of decision support provided to operators was a between-subjects factor and level of re-planning, which represents operational tempo, a within-subjects factor. The automated decision support, which took the basic form of a timeline display to aid with scheduling, had four increasing levels: manual, passive, collaborative, and management-by-exception. Level of re-planning refers to how much operators were required to adjust the initial plan in flight, based on unexpected occurrences such as changing deadlines or target sets, and included low and high levels. The passive level of decision support, which provided assistance to the user through color coding and re-organization of scheduling information, was the best overall per-

[1]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Telerobotics, Automation, and Human Supervisory Control , 2003 .

[2]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  Workload, Situation Awareness, and Teaming Issues for UAV/UCAV Operations , 2001 .

[3]  Heath A. Ruff,et al.  EXPLORING AUTOMATION ISSUES IN SUPERVISORY CONTROL OF MULTIPLE UAVS , 2004 .

[4]  D. Norman,et al.  Psychological Issues in Support of Multiple Activities , 1986 .

[5]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Using Interference Models to Predict Performance in a Multiple-Task UAV Environment - 2 UAVs , 2003 .

[6]  Heath A. Ruff,et al.  Human Interaction with Levels of Automation and Decision-Aid Fidelity in the Supervisory Control of Multiple Simulated Unmanned Air Vehicles , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[7]  H. Draper,et al.  MULTI-SENSORY DISPLAYS AND VISUALIZATION TECHNIQUES SUPPORTING THE CONTROL OF UNMANNED AIR VEHICLES , 2000 .

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

[9]  Don R. Lyon,et al.  Using Observer Ratings to Assess Situation Awareness , 2000 .

[10]  Diana Schmidt.  A Queuing Analysis of the Air Traffic Controller''s Workload , 1978 .

[11]  Barry H. Kantowitz,et al.  Mental Workload , 2020, Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine.

[12]  S S Stevens,et al.  HUMAN ENGINEERING FOR AN EFFECTIVE AIR-NAVIGATION AND TRAFFIC-CONTROL SYSTEM, AND APPENDIXES 1 THRU 3 , 1951 .

[13]  Emilie Roth,et al.  Human in the Loop Evaluation of a Mixed-Initiative System for Planning and Control of Multiple UAV Teams , 2004 .

[14]  Ben Shneiderman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[15]  Philip J. Smith,et al.  Graphical interfaces for cooperative planning systems , 1990, 1990 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Conference Proceedings.

[16]  Charles E. Billings,et al.  Aviation Automation: The Search for A Human-centered Approach , 1996 .

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

[18]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Task Switching and Multi-Robot Teams , 2005 .

[19]  Elizabeth C. Hirschman,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[20]  Stephanie Guerlain,et al.  An Interactive Decision Support Tool for Real-time In-flight Replanning of Autonomous Vehicles , 2004 .

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

[22]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Human and Computer Control of Undersea Teleoperators , 1978 .

[23]  Dan R. Olsen,et al.  Fan-out: measuring human control of multiple robots , 2004, CHI.

[24]  Mary L. Cummings,et al.  Developing Operator Capacity Estimates for Supervisory Control of Autonomous Vehicles , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[25]  R. Yerkes,et al.  The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit‐formation , 1908 .

[26]  Dan R. Olsen,et al.  Metrics for Evaluating Human-Robot Interactions , 2003 .

[27]  Mary L. Cummings,et al.  Automation Bias in Intelligent Time Critical Decision Support Systems , 2004 .

[28]  Stephanie Guerlain.  INTERACTIVE ADVISORY SYSTEMS , 2000 .

[29]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[30]  Michael Freed,et al.  Human vs. Autonomous Control of UAV Surveillance , 2004 .

[31]  Jean MacMillan,et al.  Human control in mixed-initiative systems: lessons from the MICA-SHARC program , 2003, SMC'03 Conference Proceedings. 2003 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Conference Theme - System Security and Assurance (Cat. No.03CH37483).

[32]  Mary L. Cummings,et al.  The Need for Command and Control Instant Message Adaptive Interfaces: Lessons Learned from Tactical Tomahawk Human-in-the-Loop Simulations , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[33]  K. Preston White,et al.  Systems engineering models of human-machine interaction , 1981, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[34]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Design and Evaluation for Situation Awareness Enhancement , 1988 .

[35]  David S Alberts,et al.  Network Centric Warfare: Developing and Leveraging Information Superiority , 1999 .