Layers of shared and cooperative control, assistance, and automation

Over the last centuries, we have experienced scientific, technological, and societal progress that enabled the creation of intelligent-assisted and automated machines with increasing abilities and that require a conscious distribution of roles and control between humans and machines. Machines can be more than either fully automated or manually controlled, but can work together with the human on different levels of assistance and automation in a hopefully beneficial cooperation. One way of cooperation is that the automation and the human have a shared control over a situation, e.g., a vehicle in an environment. Another way of cooperation is that they trade control. Cooperation can include shared and traded control. The objective of this paper is to give an overview on the development towards a common meta-model of shared and cooperative assistance and automation. The meta-models based on insight from the h(orse)–metaphor and Human–Machine Cooperation principles are presented and combined to propose a framework and criteria to design safe, efficient, ecological, and attractive systems. Cooperation is presented from different points of view such as levels of activity (operational, tactical and strategic levels) as well as the type of function shared between human and machine (information gathering, information analysis, decision selection, and action implementation). Examples will be provided in the aviation domain, in the automotive domain with the automation of driving, as well as in robotics and in manufacturing systems highlighting the usefulness of new automated function but also the increase of systems complexity.

[1]  Hermann Winner,et al.  Towards cooperative guidance and control of highly automated vehicles: H-Mode and Conduct-by-Wire , 2014, Ergonomics.

[2]  Christian Löper,et al.  Kooperative, manöverbasierte Automation und Arbitrierung als Bausteine für hochautomatisiertes Fahren , 2008 .

[3]  Damien Trentesaux,et al.  Designing intelligent manufacturing systems through Human-Machine Cooperation principles: A human-centered approach , 2017, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[4]  Toshiyuki Inagaki,et al.  THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF HUMAN ’ S OVERTRUST IN AND OVERRELIANCE ON ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS , 2010 .

[5]  G. Weßel,et al.  Joining the blunt and the pointy end of the spear: towards a common framework of joint action, human–machine cooperation, cooperative guidance and control, shared, traded and supervisory control , 2019, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[6]  Serge Debernard,et al.  Common work space for human–machine cooperation in air traffic control , 2002 .

[7]  Patrick Millot,et al.  A Common Work Space for a Mutual Enrichment of Human-Machine Cooperation and Team-Situation Awareness , 2013, IFAC HMS.

[8]  Jean-Christophe Popieul,et al.  Human-machine cooperation principles to support driving automation systems design , 2015 .

[9]  Lars Biester,et al.  Cooperative automation in automobiles , 2009 .

[10]  M. Tomasello.  A Natural History of Human Thinking , 2014 .

[11]  Marie-Pierre Pacaux-Lemoine,et al.  Towards Levels of Cooperation , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

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

[13]  Frédéric Vanderhaegen,et al.  Levels of automation and human-machine cooperation: Application to human-robot interaction , 2011 .

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

[15]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Experiments in adjustable autonomy , 2001, 2001 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. e-Systems and e-Man for Cybernetics in Cyberspace (Cat.No.01CH37236).

[16]  A. R. Hale,et al.  Human error models as predictors of accident scenarios for designers in road transport systems , 1990 .

[17]  Serge Debernard,et al.  Cooperation between humans and machines: First results of an experiment with a multi-level cooperative organisation in air traffic control , 1996, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[18]  Kjeld Schmidt,et al.  Cooperative work: A conceptual framework , 1991 .

[19]  Makoto Itoh,et al.  Trust View from the Human-Machine Cooperation Framework , 2018, 2018 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC).

[20]  Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to driving automation systems for on-road motor vehicles , 2022 .

[21]  Paul C. Schutte,et al.  The H-Metaphor as a Guideline for Vehicle Automation and Interaction , 2005 .

[22]  Jean-Michel Hoc,et al.  Cognitive Evaluation of Human-Human and Human-Machine Cooperation Modes in Air Traffic Control , 1998 .

[23]  Herve Morvan,et al.  An Analysis of Driver's Avoiding Maneuver in a Highly Emergency Situation , 2015 .

[24]  John A. Michon,et al.  A critical view of driver behavior models: What do we know , 1985 .

[25]  Serge Boverie,et al.  The Importance of Driver State Assessment Within Highly Automated Vehicles , 2009 .

[26]  Hermann Winner,et al.  Cooperative Guidance, Control, and Automation , 2015 .

[27]  Makoto Itoh,et al.  Towards Vertical and Horizontal Extension of Shared Control Concept , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[28]  Frederic Robache,et al.  Determination of pre-impact occupant postures and analysis of consequences on injury outcome. Part I: a driving simulator study. , 2011, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[29]  Maximilian Schwalm,et al.  Uncanny and Unsafe Valley of Assistance and Automation: First Sketch and Application to Vehicle Automation , 2017 .

[30]  Patrick Millot,et al.  Human–Machine Cooperation and Situation Awareness , 2014 .

[31]  Peggy Subirats,et al.  From technological acceptability to appropriation by users: methodological steps for device assessment in road safety. , 2014, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[32]  Luc Bongaerts,et al.  Reference architecture for holonic manufacturing systems: PROSA , 1998 .

[33]  Patrick Millot,et al.  Adaptation of the level of automation according to the type of cooperative partner , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC).

[34]  Markus Maurer,et al.  Rechtsfolgen zunehmender Fahrzeugautomatisierung , 2012 .

[35]  Reiner Onken.  The Cognitive Cockpit Assistant Systems CASSY/CAMA , 1999 .

[36]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  Skills, rules, and knowledge; signals, signs, and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[37]  Charles E. Billings,et al.  Human-Centered Aviation Automation: Principles and Guidelines , 1996 .

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

[39]  P. Millot,et al.  Man-machine cooperative organizations: formal and pragmatic implementation methods , 1995 .

[40]  Angelos Amditis,et al.  Highly Automated Vehicles for Intelligent Transport: Have-It Approach , 2008 .

[41]  Marie‐Pierre Pacaux‐Lemoine.  Human–Machine Cooperation Principles to Support Life‐Critical Systems Management , 2014 .

[42]  Patrick Millot,et al.  A method for designing levels of automation based on a human-machine cooperation model , 2017 .

[43]  Nick Bostrom,et al.  Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies , 2014 .

[44]  Huiyang Li,et al.  Human Performance Consequences of Stages and Levels of Automation , 2014, Hum. Factors.

[45]  Serge Debernard,et al.  A Common Work Space to Support the Air Traffic Control , 2000 .

[46]  Frank Flemisch,et al.  Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations , 2012, Cognition, Technology & Work.