Engineering topics

Feigh, Karen M.

Publications and source records attributed to Feigh, Karen M..

4 records

DOE OSTI2024

Exploring the role of judgement and shared situation awareness when working with AI recommender systems

Abstract AI-advised Decision Making is a form of human-autonomy teaming in which an AI recommender system suggests a solution to a human operator, who is responsible for the final decision. This work seeks to examine the importance of judgement and shared situation awareness between humans and automated agents when interacting together in the form of a recommender systems. We propose manipulating both human judgement and shared situation awareness by providing the human decision maker with relevant information that the automated agent (AI), in the form of a recommender system, uses to generate possible courses of action. This paper presents the results of a two-phase between-subjects study in which participants and a recommender system jointly make a high-stakes decision. We varied the amount of relevant information the participant had, the assessment technique of the proposed solution, and the reliability of the recommender system. Findings indicate that this technique of supporting the human’s judgement and establishing a shared situation awareness is effective in (1) boosting the human decision maker’s situation awareness and task performance, (2) calibrating their trust in AI teammates, and (3) reducing overreliance on an AI partner. Additionally, participants were able to pinpoint the limitations and boundaries of the AI partner’s capabilities. They were able to discern situations where the AI’s recommendations could be trusted versus instances when they should not rely on the AI’s advice. This work proposes and validates a way to provide model-agnostic transparency into recommender systems that can support the human decision maker and lead to improved team performance.

Srivastava, Divya↗

DOE OSTI2021

Impact Mapping for Geospatial Reasoning and Decision Making

Objective The reported study evaluated a novel approach to aiding geospatial reasoning and decision making. Background Impact mapping aims to alleviate the cognitive demands of geospatial tasks in part by externalizing data in the form of an integrated decision surface. This is achieved by aggregating data across multiple sources of information and visualizing their combined utility rather than objective measurements or individual utility. Previous research has shown that geospatial decisions improve when aided in this manner, but it remains unknown if dynamic decision making, often plagued by fatigue and anchoring bias, would benefit similarly. Method The experiment implemented a systematic manipulation of the presence of a composite impact map and the number of attributes present in a two-stage disaster relief, resource allocation task to investigate when and how impact mapping is beneficial or deleterious to decision makers. Results The presence of the composite impact map increased the utility of selected sites, increased re-planning decisions, reduced information display views, and reduced workload. Generally, the effect of the composite impact map was greater when participants were asked to evaluate more attributes. Conclusion Composite impact maps appear to improve repeated geospatial reasoning and minimize anchoring bias because they alleviate the cognitive demands otherwise necessary to interpret and maintain information from multiple attributes. Application Data visualization techniques, such as impact mapping, can improve repeated geospatial decision making in environments that include high cognitive demand.

Illingworth, David A.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Operational Assessment of Apollo Lunar Surface Extravehicular Activity

Quantifying the operational variability of extravehicular activity (EVA) execution is critical to help design and build future support systems to enable astronauts to monitor and manage operations in deep-space, where ground support operators will no longer be able to react instantly and manage execution deviations due to the significant communication latency. This study quantifies the operational variability exhibited during Apollo 14-17 lunar surface EVA operations to better understand the challenges and natural tendencies of timeline execution and life support system performance involved in surface operations. Each EVA (11 in total) is individually summarized as well as aggregated to provide descriptive trends exhibited throughout the Apollo missions. This work extends previous EVA task analyses by calculating deviations between planned and as-performed timelines as well as examining metabolic rate and consumables usage throughout the execution of each EVA. The intent of this work is to convey the natural variability of EVA operations and to provide operational context for coping with the variability inherent to EVA execution as a means to support future concepts of operations.

planning and scheduling↗

NASA NTRS2014

Information Flow Model of Human Extravehicular Activity Operations

Future human spaceflight missions will face the complex challenge of performing human extravehicular activity (EVA) beyond the low Earth orbit (LEO) environment. Astronauts will become increasingly isolated from Earth-based mission support and thus will rely heavily on their own decision-making capabilities and onboard tools to accomplish proposed EVA mission objectives. To better address time delay communication issues, EVA characters, e.g. flight controllers, astronauts, etc., and their respective work practices and roles need to be better characterized and understood. This paper presents the results of a study examining the EVA work domain and the personnel that operate within it. The goal is to characterize current and historical roles of ground support, intravehicular (IV) crew and EV crew, their communication patterns and information needs. This work provides a description of EVA operations and identifies issues to be used as a basis for future investigation.

Miller, Matthew J.↗