Adaptive aiding with an individualized workload model based on psychophysiological measures

Potential benefits of technology such as automation are oftentimes negated by improper use and application. Adaptive systems provide a means to calibrate the use of technological aids to the operator’s state, such as workload state, which can change throughout the course of a task. Such systems require a workload model which detects workload and specifies the level at which aid should be rendered. Workload models that use psychophysiological measures have the advantage of detecting workload continuously and relatively unobtrusively, although the inter-individual variability in psychophysiological responses to workload is a major challenge for many models. This study describes an approach to workload modeling with multiple psychophysiological measures that was generalizable across individuals, and yet accommodated inter-individual variability. Under this approach, several novel algorithms were formulated. Each of these underwent a process of evaluation which included comparisons of the algorithm’s performance to an at-chance level, and assessment of algorithm robustness. Further evaluations involved the sensitivity of the shortlisted algorithms at various threshold values for triggering an adaptive aid.

Adaptive Aiding of Human-Robot Teaming

In many emerging civilian and military operations, human operators are increasingly being tasked to supervise multiple robotic uninhabited vehicles (UVs) with the support of automation. As 100% automation reliability cannot be assured, it is important to understand the effects of automation imperfection on performance. In addition, adaptive aiding may help counter any adverse effects of static (fixed) automation. Using a high-fidelity multi-UV simulation involving both air and ground vehicles, two experiments examined the effects of automation reliability and adaptive automation on human-system performance with different levels of task load. In Experiment 1, participants performed a reconnaissance mission while assisted with an automatic target recognition (ATR) system whose reliability was low, medium, or high. Overall human-robot team performance was higher than with either human or ATR performance alone. In Experiment 2, participants performed a similar reconnaissance mission with no ATR, static automation, or with adaptive automation keyed to task load. Participant trust and self-confidence were higher and workload was lower for adaptive automation compared with the other conditions. The results show that human-robot teams can benefit from imperfect static automation even in high task load conditions and that adaptive automation can provide additional benefits in trust and workload.