thrust iii hri studies for human factors and performance evaluation j. a. adams (lead – task a) p....

Thrust IIIHRI Studies for Human Factors and Performance Evaluation

J. A. Adams (Lead – Task A)P. Hinds (Lead – Task B)

C. BreazealJ. HowN. Roy

MURI 8Kickoff Meeting 2007


Thrust III: Objective

Empirical evaluation of remote human operator and human teammate levels of cognitive-load, situation awareness, trust, and performance related to efficient, flexible, and effective HRI, human-robot team structures, team mental models, and system scalability.

MIT-Vanderbilt-StanfordUW-UMASS Amherst


III.A: Task Objectives

Provide a means of empirically evaluating potential human-robot interaction and visualization options prior to full system and hardware integration.



III.A Existing Technology

Microsoft Robotics Studio simulation of the MDS robots

Quadrotor simulator



III.A Existing Evaluation Methods

A number of evaluation methods exist that will be incorporated, as appropriate, for assessing Usability (e.g. Errors) Workload (e.g. NASA TLX, Multiple Resources

Questionnaire) Situation Awareness (e.g. SAGAT, SART) Team coordination (e.g. Observation, Efficiency) HRI Metrics (e.g. Effectiveness, Fan Out)



III.A Technical Advances

Quantitative evaluation of visualization interaction alternatives with simulated vehicles. Permits preliminary evaluation for cognitive

limitations, situation awareness, and team performance.

Permits the narrowing of alternatives for future development.



III.A: Year 1 Milestones/Deliverables

Simulation based evaluations of potential UV specialist, triage officer (division chief), and incident commander. Visualizations and interactions Transitions with historical context



III.A: Year 2+ Milestones/Deliverables

Simulation based evaluations of triage specific HRI for the UV specialist, triage

officer (division chief), and incident commander. Situation awareness drill down

HAZMAT HRI capabilities. the integrated HRI visualizations, interactions,

drill down, and transition capabilities.



III.B: Task Objectives

Empirical evaluation of human operator and human team member levels with real hardware. Assessing cognitive-load, situation awareness,

trust, and performance related to efficient, flexible, and effective HRI, human-robot team structures, team mental models, and system scalability.



III.B Existing Evaluation Methods

Trust An elusive characteristic to measure in

human-robot interaction. Neither human-human nor trust in automation

scales are effective indicators of trust in embodied and mobile robots.



III.B Technical Advances

Empirical results that advance the state of the art understanding of trust by humans in robotic systems teaming between humans and robotic systems situation awareness and cognitive demands placed on

humans functioning as remote supervisors of robotic and human teams transitioning between remote operator roles maintaining common ground among the multiple user

levels/roles. when acting as a peer/teammate with robotic systems



III.B: Year 1 Milestones/Deliverables

Task specific evaluations of UV specialist, triage officer (division chief), and incident commander. Visualizations and interactions Transitions with historical context



III.B: Year 2+ Milestones/Deliverables

Year 2: Continued evaluations triage specific HRI for the UV specialist, triage officer

(division chief), and incident commander. Situation awareness drill down

HAZMAT HRI capabilities. Peer-to-peer HRI capabilities

Year 2+: Evaluation of integrated remote HRI visualizations,

interactions, drill down, and transition capabilities. System evaluations of overall and human-robot team

performance, trust, and system capabilities. Evaluations of distributed HRI.


thrust iii hri studies for human factors and performance evaluation j. a. adams (lead – task a) p....

Documents

stanforduwumass amherstiii

human teamstransitioning

human factors

performance evaluation

humanrobot team structures

human team member levels

team performance

robotic systemsmitvanderbilt