D. Bryant and J. Hollands DRDC Toronto Human Systems Integration September 2010 Decision Aids for...

Post on 20-Jan-2016

221 views 0 download

Tags:

Transcript of D. Bryant and J. Hollands DRDC Toronto Human Systems Integration September 2010 Decision Aids for...

D. Bryant and J. HollandsDRDC TorontoHuman Systems Integration

September 2010

Decision Aids for Soldiers

2

Combat Identification (CID)

• Combat Identification (CID) is the capability to identify friendly, enemy and neutral forces rapidly and accurately.

– When a weapon is fired, it is fired at an appropriate target

• Major risk factors are the loss of situation awareness and misidentification of the target

3

Decision Support Concepts

• IFF Systems

– Markings (fluorescent, infrared reflecting, etc.)

– Non-cooperative approaches (beacons)

– IFF for ground vehicles (millimetre wave (mmW), infrared laser, and radio-frequency (RF) based solutions)

• Blue Force Tracking (BFT)

– Mitigate the risk of fratricide by supplying positional information regarding friendly units to enhance SA

– U.S. Army BFT system consists of a computer, satellite antenna, and Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver

– BFT employs a notebook-size, rugged, 12-inch diagonal daylight-visible computer display, strapped on or bolted into vehicles, as an interface for operators

4

IMMERSIVE

• IMMERSIVE (Instrumented Military Modeling Engine for Research using SImulation and Virtual Environments)

– Simulated combat environment

– Based on Unreal Tournament software

– First-person perspective of a dismounted infantry soldier

• This platform presents blocks of trials consisting of:

– Terrain (urban environment)

– roBOTic computer controlled entities (BOTs)

– Scenario (sequence of BOT movements and actions)

• Subjects played the role of a dismounted soldier

– Controlled the movement of the rifle with the mouse and fired by pressing the left button

5

IMMERSIVE Environment

6

Subject’s View

7

IMMERSIVE “BOTs”

8

Simulated Rifle-Mounted IFF

9

Hand-held BFT

10

Hit Rate

11

False Alarm Rate

12

Blue Force Tracking (BFT)

• Current BFT systems implemented at vehicle level

• Can study impact of hand-held BFT for individual soldiers in the IMMERSIVE environment

– Simulate BFT as PDA device

– Simulate potential problems/errors in system

• Lag or delay in updating positional information

13

Experiment 3: False Alarm Rate

14

Conclusion

• Computer-based simulation offers two benefits:

– Learn about CID decision making and test models

– Evaluate decision support concepts before they are actually available

• Both IFF and BFT are viable CID support concepts

• Negative effect of update lag on BFT indicates that systems may not provide benefits under some conditions

15

Reliance on Soldier Decision Aids

• Advances in soldier decision aids

• Soldier Information requirements

• Disclosing system reliability

• Displaying reliability (uncertainty)

• See through display DIR

16

Soldier Information Requirements

• Improved SA, performance benefits and high usability and acceptance with augmented reality information displayed using Virtual Retinal Displays or dashboard, spectacle mounted HMDs

• Consider displaying cueing information (e.g., rolling compass, indicators for next waypoint, bearing, location of friendly and enemy entities) superimposed on real scene.

• Egocentric: FFOV spatial and identity information

17

IFF vs BFT: uncertainty about ‘unknown’ feedback

Feedback: ‘friend’ (explicit), ‘unknown’ (implicit) ‘Friend’ reliability : P( friendly | ’friend’ ) ≈ 100%

‘Unknown’ reliability : P( hostile | ‘unknown’ ) < 100%

Individual Combat ID System

Wang, L., Jamieson, G. A., & Hollands, J. G. (2009). Trust and reliance on an automated combat identification system. Human Factors, 51, 281-291.

Wang, L., Jamieson, G. A., & Hollands, J. G. (2009). Trust and reliance on an automated combat identification system. Human Factors, 51, 281-291.

18

Human-Automation Performance

• Generally human-automation performance improves with automation reliability

• However, for CID even highly reliable aids failed to improved target identification (Dzindolet, Pierce, Beck, Dawe, & Anderson, 2000, 2001; Dzindolet, Pierce, Pomranky, Peterson, & Beck, 2001; Karsh et al., 1995; Kogler, 2003)

• Trust in automated system not examined

19

Methodology and Measures Task: Make correct engagement decisions

if hostile shoot; if friend hold fire

SDT reliance measure

Participant’s viewFriendly Hostile

Hollands, J. G., & Neyedli, H. F. (in press). A reliance model for automated combat identification systems: Implications for trust in automation. In N. Stanton (Ed.), Trust in military teams. Farnham, England: Ashgate.

Hollands, J. G., & Neyedli, H. F. (in press). A reliance model for automated combat identification systems: Implications for trust in automation. In N. Stanton (Ed.), Trust in military teams. Farnham, England: Ashgate.

20

CID accuracy was improved in the 80% condition but not in the 67% reliabilty condition

• Informed group changed their response bias more appropriately than the uninformed group

Results

80% 67%

21

Displaying Uncertainty• No Feedback (unknown feedback)=????

Finger & Bisantz, 2002

Numeric38% 60% p=0.05

Linguisticlikely, unlikely, probable

Graphic

Neyedli, H., Hollands, J. G., & Jamieson, G. A. (2009). Human reliance on an automated combat identification system: Effects of display format. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society – 53rd Annual Meeting (pp. 212-216). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

Neyedli, H., Hollands, J. G., & Jamieson, G. A. (2009). Human reliance on an automated combat identification system: Effects of display format. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society – 53rd Annual Meeting (pp. 212-216). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

22

Experimental Design

2 display method x 2 display format x 5 reliability levels

display methodMesh Pie

integrated

separated

23

Results: Interface Format

Compute ßoptimal equation. ßactual fit to ßoptimal model.

Pie: R2 = 0.24, Mesh: R2 = 0.19 Pie: R2 = -0.04, Mesh: R2 = -0.27

Integrated Separated

24

Results: Display Method

Mesh

Pie

Reliability Level

d’

25

DIR: See-Through Eyeglass Wearable Display Revision Eyewear Inc.Project Objectives

The primary objective of this DIR is to develop and prototype wearable display related technologies with mid-term future growth to provide long-term technology options to the sniper community and the broader Land Force.

26

Implications

• DIR project is supported by the military sponsor (DLR-5) and will have long term benefits for the Integrated Soldier System Project (ISSP).

• Image and information display to soldiers using protective eyewear integrated with see-through display combines ISR and protection together

• Our work on Decision Aids for Soldiers provides potential content

• Enhance the situational awareness and survivability of the CF

27

28