More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Open access

Mixed-initiative control of a roadable air vehicle for non-pilots

Authors:

Michael C. Dorneich,

Emmanuel Letsu-Dake,

Sebastian Scherer,

Lyle Chamberlain,

Marcel BergermanAuthors Info & Claims

Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, Volume 4, Issue 3

Pages 38 - 61

https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.4.3.Dorneich

Published: 06 December 2015 Publication History

Abstract

This work developed and evaluated a human-machine interface for the control of a roadable air vehicle (RAV), capable of surface driving, vertical takeoff, sustained flight, and landing. Military applications seek to combine the benefits of ground and air vehicles to maximize flexibility of movement but require that the operator have minimal pilot training. This makes the operator vulnerable to automation complexity issues; however, the operator will expect to be able to interact extensively and control the vehicle during flight. A mixed-initiative control approach mitigates these vulnerabilities by integrating the operator into many complex control domains in the way that they often expect---flexibly in charge, aware, but not required to issue every command. Intrinsic safety aspects were evaluated by comparing performance, decision making, precision, and workload for three RAV control paradigms: human-only, fully automated, and mixed-initiative control. The results suggest that the mixed-initiative paradigm leverages the benefits of human and automated control while also avoiding the drawbacks associated with each.

References

[1]

Abbott, T. (1993). Functional categories for future flight deck designs. NASA Technical Memorandum TM-109005. Hampton, VA: NASA Langley Research Center.

[2]

Allen, J. F. (1999). Mixed-initiative interaction. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 14(5), 14--16.

Digital Library

[3]

Alter, K. W., Erickson, J. B., Goins, R. T., Hofer, E. F., Koehn, W. L., Miles, W. L., . . . Pfaff, T. A. (1995). High speed research flight deck design and integration flight deck concepts. Seattle, WA: Boeing/McDonnell Douglas Industry Team.

[4]

Barnard Microsystems Limited (2011). Reliability of unmanned aircraft. Retrieved from http://www.barnardmicrosystems.com

[5]

Beringer, D. B. (2002). Applying performance controlled systems, fuzzy logic, and fly-by-wire controls to general aviation. Tech. Rep. DOT/FAA/AM-02/7. Oklahoma City, OK: Federal Aviation Administration.

[6]

Billings, C. E. (1997). Aviation automation: The search for a human centered approach. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

[7]

Carbonell, J. R. (1970). Mixed-initiative man-computer instructional dialogues. Final report. Tech. Rep. No. BBN-1971, Job No. 11399. Cambridge, MA: Bolt Beranek & Newman, Inc.

[8]

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

[9]

DARPA (2010). Transformer (TX) vertical takeoff and landing roadable air vehicle. Retrieved from: https://www.fbo.gov/download/d10/d10015bd49ec44f4414d65635bc1a37e/TX_BAA_Version_62_&_Appendix_A.pdf

[10]

Donaldson, T. & Cohen, R. (1997). A constraint satisfaction framework for managing mixed-initiative discourse. In Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium: Computational Models for Mixed Initiative Interaction, Palo Alto, CA: AAAI Tech. Rep. SS-97--04, pp. 37--43.

[11]

FAA (1988). System design and analysis. Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular AC 25.1309--1A. Retrieved from http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%2025.1309-1A.pdf

[12]

Flemisch, F., Adams, C. A., Conway, S. R., Goodrich, K. H., Palmer, M. T., & Schutte, P. C. (2003). The H-Metaphor as a guideline for vehicle automation and interaction, Tech. Rep. No. NASA/TM---2003--212672. Hampton, VA: NASA, Langley Research Center.

[13]

Flemisch, F., Heesen, M., Hesse, T., Kelsch, J., Schieben, A., & Beller, J. (2012). Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: Authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations. Cognition, Technology & Work, 14(1), 3--18.

Digital Library

[14]

Genta, G., Morello, L., Cavallino, F., & Filtri, L. (2014). The motor car. Springer: The Netherlands.

[15]

Goodrich, M. A., Olsen, D. R., Crandall, J. W., & Palmer, T. J. (2001). Experiments in adjustable autonomy. In Proceedings of IJCAI Workshop on Autonomy, Delegation and Control: Interacting with Intelligent Agents. Tucson, AZ, pp. 1624--1629.

[16]

Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of a multi-dimensional workload rating scale: Results of empirical and theoretical research. In P. Hancock & N. Meshkati (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139--183). North Holland, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

[17]

Jump, M., Perfect, G. D., White, M. D., Floreano, D., Fua, P., Zufferey, J. C., . . . Bülthoff, H. H. (2011). myCopter: Enabling technologies for personal air transport systems. The future rotorcraft--enabling capability through the application of technology. London, UK.

[18]

Kortenkamp, D., Bonasso, R. P., Ryan, D., & Schreckenghost, D. (1997). Traded control with autonomous robots as mixed initiative interaction. In Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium on Mixed Initiative Interaction. Stanford, CA.

[19]

Landén, D., Heintz, F., & Doherty, P. (2012). Complex task allocation in mixed-initiative delegation: A UAV case study. In N. Desai, A. Liu, & M. Winikoff (Eds.), Principles and practice of multi-agent systems (pp. 288--303). Berlin: Springer.

Digital Library

[20]

Lee, S. M., Kim, S. Y., & Feigh, K. M. (2009). Structural framework for performance-based assessment of ATM systems. In Proceedings of the AIAA Conference on Aviation Technology, Information, and Operations. Hilton Head, SC.

[21]

Miller, C. A., Funk, H. B., Dorneich, M., & Whitlow, S. D. (2002, October). A playbook interface for mixed initiative control of multiple unmanned vehicle teams. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Irvine, CA.

[22]

Miller, C. A., & Parasuraman, R. (2007). Designing for flexible interaction between humans and automation: Delegation interfaces for supervisory control. Human Factors, 49(1), 57--75.

[23]

Moore, M. D. (2006). The third wave of aeronautics: On-demand mobility. In SAE General Aviation Technology Conference and Exhibition, SAE (pp. 01--2429).

[24]

Pacaux-Lemoine, M-P., Debernard, S. (2000). A common work space to support the air traffic control. Control Engineering Practice, 10 (pp. 571--576).

[25]

PAL-V (2012). Flying car makes successful maiden flight. Retrieved from http://pal-v.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Pal-V_press_release.pdf

[26]

Parasuraman, R., & Bowers, J.C. (1987). Attention and vigilance in human-computer interaction. In A. Gale & B. Christie (Eds.), Psychophysiology of the electronic workplace (pp. 163--194). London: Wiley.

[27]

Parasuraman, R. and Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39(2), 230--253.

[28]

Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T.B., & Wickens, C.D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transaction on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics---Part A: Systems and Humans, 30(3).

Digital Library

[29]

Rasmussen, J., & Vicente, K. J. (1989). Coping with human errors through system design: Implications for ecological interface design. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 31(5), 517--534.

Digital Library

[30]

Reason, J. (1990). Human error. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[31]

Riley, V. (1989). A general model of mixed-initiative human-machine systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) Conference. Denver, CO.

[32]

Rognin L., Salembier P., & Zouinar M. (2000). Cooperation, reliability of socio-technical systems and allocation of function. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52, 357--379.

Digital Library

[33]

Sheridan, T. (1987). Supervisory control. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of Human Factors (pp. 1244--1268). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

[34]

Scherer, S. (2011, May). Low-altitude operation of unmanned rotorcraft. (Doctoral dissertation). Tech. Rep. CMU-RI-TR-11--03, Robotics Institute, Carnegie Mellon University. Retrieved from https://www.ri.cmu.edu/pub_files/2011/5/thesis-sebastian-final.pdf

Digital Library

[35]

Scherer, S., Chamberlain, L., & Singh, S. (2012). Autonomous landing at unprepared sites by a full-scale helicopter. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 60(12), 1545--1562.

Digital Library

[36]

Schmidt, K. (1990). Analysis of cooperative work: A conceptual framework. Risø National Laboratory, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark (Risø-M-2890).

[37]

Smith, P. J., McCoy, E. C., Layton, C. (1997). Brittleness in the design of cooperative problem-solving systems: The effects of user performance. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics---Part A, 27(3).

Digital Library

[38]

Terrafugia (2012, July). Terrafugia's Transition® street legal airplane continues flight and drive testing. Retrieved from http://www.terrafugia.com/news_media.html.

[39]

Weissler, P., Mason, D., & Woock, K. (2012). Flying car makes debut in New York. Benefits, 2011, 10--17.

[40]

Woods, D. (1996). Decomposing automation: Apparent simplicity, real complexity. In R. Parasuraman & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 3--17). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cited By

Berger M(2022)Social Control Interaction Framework: Design to Technically Support a Group of Users in Making Control Decisions TogetherExtended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491101.3503802(1-6)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491101.3503802
Dönmez Özkan YMirnig AMeschtscherjakov ADemir CTscheligi M(2021)Mode Awareness Interfaces in Automated Vehicles, Robotics, and Aviation: A Literature Review13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3409118.3475125(147-158)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3409118.3475125
Kujala TSaariluoma P(2018)Cognitive Mimetics for Designing Intelligent TechnologiesAdvances in Human-Computer Interaction10.1155/2018/92158632018Online publication date: 1-Jan-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1155/2018/9215863

Mixed-initiative control of a roadable air vehicle for non-pilots
1. Applied computing
  1. Physical sciences and engineering
2. Human-centered computing

Recommendations

Trajectory tracking control for a miniature fixed-wing unmanned air vehicle

This article considers the problem of trajectory tracking control for a miniature fixed-wing unmanned air vehicle (UAV). With the UAV equipped with longitudinal and lateral autopilots, we adopt a kinematic model that takes into account the fact that the ...
Design and Implementation of Hovering Flapping Wing Micro Air Vehicle
Intelligent Robotics and Applications
Abstract
In this paper, a prototype of a hovering flapping wing micro air vehicle is developed. The aerodynamic force of the prototype at different flapping frequencies and pitch angles is measured, and a hovering flight control scheme for the vehicle is ...
Simulation and control of mini UAVs
SMO'05: Proceedings of the 5th WSEAS international conference on Simulation, modelling and optimization

The capabilities to perform missions in hostile and/or hardly accessible areas reducing human risks are responsible of the growing interest in Uninhabited Air Vehicles (UAVs) characterizing the last years. Recent advances in Information and ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Human-Robot Interaction

Journal of Human-Robot Interaction Volume 4, Issue 3

Special Issue on Shared Control

December 2015

193 pages

EISSN:2163-0364

Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

Journal of Human-Robot Interaction Steering Committee

Publication History

Published: 06 December 2015

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

U.S. Air Force
Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
445
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)182
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)10

Reflects downloads up to 13 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Berger M(2022)Social Control Interaction Framework: Design to Technically Support a Group of Users in Making Control Decisions TogetherExtended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491101.3503802(1-6)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491101.3503802
Dönmez Özkan YMirnig AMeschtscherjakov ADemir CTscheligi M(2021)Mode Awareness Interfaces in Automated Vehicles, Robotics, and Aviation: A Literature Review13th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications10.1145/3409118.3475125(147-158)Online publication date: 9-Sep-2021
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3409118.3475125
Kujala TSaariluoma P(2018)Cognitive Mimetics for Designing Intelligent TechnologiesAdvances in Human-Computer Interaction10.1155/2018/92158632018Online publication date: 1-Jan-2018
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1155/2018/9215863

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents