飞行甲板上自适应系统的人类性能风险和收益

M. Dorneich, W. Rogers, S. Whitlow, R. DeMers
{"title":"飞行甲板上自适应系统的人类性能风险和收益","authors":"M. Dorneich, W. Rogers, S. Whitlow, R. DeMers","doi":"10.1080/10508414.2016.1226834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective: Human performance risks and benefits of adaptive systems were identified through a systematic analysis and pilot evaluation of adaptive system component types and characteristics. Background: As flight-deck automation is able to process ever more types of information in sophisticated ways to identify situations, it is becoming more realistic for adaptive systems to adapt behavior based on their own authority. Method: A framework was developed to describe the types and characteristics of adaptive system components and was used to perform a risk–benefit analysis to identify potential issues. Subsequently, eight representative adaptive system storyboards were developed for an evaluation with pilots to augment the analysis results and to explore more detailed issues and potential risk mitigations. Results: Analysis identified the principal drivers of adaptive “triggering conditions” risk as complexity and transparency. It also identified the drivers of adaptations risks and benefits as the task level and the level of control versus information adaptation. Conclusion: Pilots did not seem to distinguish between adaptive automation and normal automation if the rules were simple and obvious; however, their perception of risk increased when the level of complexity and opacity of triggering conditions reached a point where its behavior was perceived as nondeterministic.","PeriodicalId":83071,"journal":{"name":"The International journal of aviation psychology","volume":"26 1","pages":"15 - 35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10508414.2016.1226834","citationCount":"19","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human Performance Risks and Benefits of Adaptive Systems on the Flight Deck\",\"authors\":\"M. Dorneich, W. Rogers, S. Whitlow, R. DeMers\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10508414.2016.1226834\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Objective: Human performance risks and benefits of adaptive systems were identified through a systematic analysis and pilot evaluation of adaptive system component types and characteristics. Background: As flight-deck automation is able to process ever more types of information in sophisticated ways to identify situations, it is becoming more realistic for adaptive systems to adapt behavior based on their own authority. Method: A framework was developed to describe the types and characteristics of adaptive system components and was used to perform a risk–benefit analysis to identify potential issues. Subsequently, eight representative adaptive system storyboards were developed for an evaluation with pilots to augment the analysis results and to explore more detailed issues and potential risk mitigations. Results: Analysis identified the principal drivers of adaptive “triggering conditions” risk as complexity and transparency. It also identified the drivers of adaptations risks and benefits as the task level and the level of control versus information adaptation. Conclusion: Pilots did not seem to distinguish between adaptive automation and normal automation if the rules were simple and obvious; however, their perception of risk increased when the level of complexity and opacity of triggering conditions reached a point where its behavior was perceived as nondeterministic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The International journal of aviation psychology\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"15 - 35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10508414.2016.1226834\",\"citationCount\":\"19\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The International journal of aviation psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508414.2016.1226834\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The International journal of aviation psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508414.2016.1226834","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 19

摘要

摘要目的:通过对自适应系统组件类型和特征的系统分析和试点评估,确定自适应系统的人类绩效风险和收益。背景:随着飞行甲板自动化能够以复杂的方式处理越来越多类型的信息来识别情况,自适应系统根据自己的权威来调整行为变得越来越现实。方法:开发了一个框架来描述自适应系统组件的类型和特征,并用于进行风险-收益分析以识别潜在问题。随后,开发了8个具有代表性的自适应系统故事板,用于与试点进行评估,以增加分析结果,并探索更详细的问题和潜在的风险缓解。结果:分析确定了适应性“触发条件”风险的主要驱动因素是复杂性和透明度。它还确定了适应风险和利益的驱动因素,如任务水平和控制与信息适应的水平。结论:在规则简单明了的情况下,飞行员似乎无法区分自适应自动化和正常自动化;然而,当触发条件的复杂性和不透明性达到其行为被认为是不确定的程度时,他们对风险的感知就会增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Human Performance Risks and Benefits of Adaptive Systems on the Flight Deck
ABSTRACT Objective: Human performance risks and benefits of adaptive systems were identified through a systematic analysis and pilot evaluation of adaptive system component types and characteristics. Background: As flight-deck automation is able to process ever more types of information in sophisticated ways to identify situations, it is becoming more realistic for adaptive systems to adapt behavior based on their own authority. Method: A framework was developed to describe the types and characteristics of adaptive system components and was used to perform a risk–benefit analysis to identify potential issues. Subsequently, eight representative adaptive system storyboards were developed for an evaluation with pilots to augment the analysis results and to explore more detailed issues and potential risk mitigations. Results: Analysis identified the principal drivers of adaptive “triggering conditions” risk as complexity and transparency. It also identified the drivers of adaptations risks and benefits as the task level and the level of control versus information adaptation. Conclusion: Pilots did not seem to distinguish between adaptive automation and normal automation if the rules were simple and obvious; however, their perception of risk increased when the level of complexity and opacity of triggering conditions reached a point where its behavior was perceived as nondeterministic.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
EOV Editorial Board Gaze Behavior and Visual Attention: A Review of Eye Tracking Studies in Aviation The International Journal of Aviation Psychology Reviewers 2016 Exposure to Disturbance Motion During Practice in an Analog of a Flight Task Influences Flight Control of Naive Participants Investigating Non-Technical Skills in Scottish and English Aircraft Maintenance Teams Using a Mixed Methodology of Interviews and a Questionnaire
×
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