An automated method to detect potential mode confusions

John Rushby, Judith Crow, Everett Palmer
{"title":"An automated method to detect potential mode confusions","authors":"John Rushby, Judith Crow, Everett Palmer","doi":"10.1109/DASC.1999.863725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mode confusions are a type of \"automation surprise\"-circumstances where an automated system behaves differently than its operator expects. It is generally accepted that operators develop \"mental models\" for the behavior of automated systems and use these to guide their interaction with the systems concerned, so that an automation surprise results when the actual system behavior diverges from its operator's mental model. Complex systems are often structured into \"modes\" (for example, an autopilot might have different modes for altitude capture, altitude hold, and so on), and their behavior can change significantly across different modes. \"Mode confusion\" arises when the system is in a different mode than that assumed by its operator; this is a rich source of automation surprises, since the operator may interact with the system according to a mental model that is inappropriate for its actual mode. Mode confusions have been implicated in several recent crashes and other incidents, and are a growing source of concern in modern automated cockpits. If we accept that mode confusions are due to a mismatch between the actual behavior of a system and the mental model of its operator, then one way to look for potential mode confusions is to compare the design of the actual system against a mental model. There are two challenges here: how to get hold of a mental model, and how to do the comparison. Through observation, questionnaires, and other techniques, psychologists have been able to elicit the mental models of individual operators (typically pilots). However, comparison between a design and the mental model of a specific individual will provide only very specific information; we are interested in whether a design is prone to mode confusions, and for this purpose it is more useful to compare the design against a generic mental model rather than that of an individual.","PeriodicalId":269139,"journal":{"name":"Gateway to the New Millennium. 18th Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH37033)","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"53","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gateway to the New Millennium. 18th Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.99CH37033)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC.1999.863725","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 53

Abstract

Mode confusions are a type of "automation surprise"-circumstances where an automated system behaves differently than its operator expects. It is generally accepted that operators develop "mental models" for the behavior of automated systems and use these to guide their interaction with the systems concerned, so that an automation surprise results when the actual system behavior diverges from its operator's mental model. Complex systems are often structured into "modes" (for example, an autopilot might have different modes for altitude capture, altitude hold, and so on), and their behavior can change significantly across different modes. "Mode confusion" arises when the system is in a different mode than that assumed by its operator; this is a rich source of automation surprises, since the operator may interact with the system according to a mental model that is inappropriate for its actual mode. Mode confusions have been implicated in several recent crashes and other incidents, and are a growing source of concern in modern automated cockpits. If we accept that mode confusions are due to a mismatch between the actual behavior of a system and the mental model of its operator, then one way to look for potential mode confusions is to compare the design of the actual system against a mental model. There are two challenges here: how to get hold of a mental model, and how to do the comparison. Through observation, questionnaires, and other techniques, psychologists have been able to elicit the mental models of individual operators (typically pilots). However, comparison between a design and the mental model of a specific individual will provide only very specific information; we are interested in whether a design is prone to mode confusions, and for this purpose it is more useful to compare the design against a generic mental model rather than that of an individual.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一个自动检测潜在模式混淆的方法
模式混淆是一种“自动化意外”——自动系统的行为与其操作者的预期不同。人们普遍认为,操作人员会为自动化系统的行为建立“心理模型”,并用这些模型来指导他们与相关系统的交互,因此,当实际系统行为偏离操作人员的心理模型时,就会产生自动化意外。复杂的系统通常被构建成“模式”(例如,自动驾驶仪可能有不同的高度捕获、高度保持等模式),它们的行为在不同的模式下会发生显著变化。当系统处于与其操作者所假定的模式不同的模式时,就会出现“模式混淆”;这是自动化意外的丰富来源,因为操作人员可能根据不适合其实际模式的心理模型与系统进行交互。模式混淆在最近的几起坠机和其他事故中都有涉及,并且在现代自动驾驶座舱中越来越受到关注。如果我们接受模式混淆是由于系统的实际行为与其操作者的心理模型之间的不匹配,那么寻找潜在模式混淆的一种方法是将实际系统的设计与心理模型进行比较。这里有两个挑战:如何掌握一个心理模型,以及如何进行比较。通过观察、问卷调查和其他技术,心理学家已经能够引出个体操作员(通常是飞行员)的心理模型。然而,将设计与特定个体的心智模型进行比较只能提供非常具体的信息;我们感兴趣的是设计是否容易产生模式混淆,为此,将设计与通用心智模型进行比较比将设计与个人心智模型进行比较更有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
REE: a COTS-based fault tolerant parallel processing supercomputer for spacecraft onboard scientific data analysis Head-up display symbology for ground collision avoidance Development of an aircraft performance risk assessment model A component framework for satellite on-board software Goals analysis procedure, guidelines for applying the goals analysis process
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1