Upload
tamas
View
71
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The Cognitive Engineering of Human-Agent-Robot Systems. Peter Benda PhD Candidate Department of Information Systems. Key messages. Thinking in ‘ecological systems’ sense can provide ‘engineering/design leverage’ Cognitive systems engineering might provide representations or models that - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
The Cognitive Engineering of Human-Agent-Robot Systems
Peter BendaPhD CandidateDepartment of Information Systems
2010 Department of Information Systems
Key messages Thinking in ‘ecological systems’ sense
can provide ‘engineering/design leverage’
Cognitive systems engineering might provide representations or models thatcan be shared by humans and robots at
an ‘interface’ levelbe useful in designing ‘resilient’ work
systems Propose doctoral research that may
provide leverage in designing ‘resilient’ HART systems
2010 Department of Information Systems
What I want from HART learn what interesting and relevant
work is out there
guidance for next steps in the PhDPlease don’t tell me to quit!Focus . . .
look for opportunities for collaboration
2010 Department of Information Systems
My Background BAppSc + MAppSc Ind. & Mech
Engineering (Toronto) ~10 years HCI & HF consulting,
corporate work 4 years research fellow:“Maximising the effectiveness of
interactive automated programs for smoking cessation”
2010 Department of Information Systems
Quit Smoking Support (Briefly)
expert system model, ‘basic messaging’/advice system based on modified TTM
5 conditions (5 variations of coaching system/controls)
iterative development model—ethnographic studies
RCT 3800+ participants (quitting smokers)
2010 Department of Information Systems
Where to start? Transition from work in HF (CogEng),
HCI to a desire to work with ‘Agents’
Initial reviews of HF/Cog Eng literature and Agent literature; is there any common ground?
Perspective is of a ‘systems design problem’
2010 Department of Information Systems
Systems Engineering & Design Perspective
Broadly:
“How do we design a human-agent-robot system?”
. . . . what does it mean to design a ‘robust’ or ‘resilient’ HAR system?
2010 Department of Information Systems
Agent Lit Generally CoveredR-CAST
BRAHMS
Meta analyses of agent modelling approaches
ACT-R/ SOAR
Social Simulation
Game Theory
Cohen & LevesqueShared
Plans
Evolutionary ‘Ecological’ Agents
HRI
Joint Intentions
BDIBradshaw
Kaminka
Wayne Gray
John Yen
2010 Department of Information Systems
HF/CSE Lit ReviewedKlein’s RPD
Woods & Hollnagel’s Joint
Cognitive Systems
Hutchins
Lintern
Human Perception of AutomationParasuraman &
Sheridan s levels of automation
Perrow’s Normal Accidents, Complex Systems
Vicente & Rasmussen’s
Cognitive Work Analysis
Zieba on resilient H-A-R
Systems
2010 Department of Information Systems
Perspectives on HF and Agent literature
HF literature typically deals with Understanding human behaviour with automation,understanding human ‘perception’ of automation
• User acceptance issues Optimising human use of automation Analysis of system error training outcomes,
prevention, interface design Agent literature
Models upon which synthetic agents can be based• Cognitive, decision making , perceptual, behavioural, social
psych etc.• Provide insight into ‘human behaviours’
Optimisation of multi-agent systems (typically synthetic) Problem-solving systems etc
2010 Department of Information Systems
BUT
2010 Department of Information Systems
Klein et al.: 10 key challenges Klein et al.’s (2004) 10 key challenges facing
such H-M systems (I’m looking at you, Bradshaw!)
1. Basic Compact2. Adequate Models3. Predictability: Human-agent team members must be mutually predictable4. Directability: Agents must be directable.5. Revealing Status and Intentions: Agents must be able to make pertinent
aspects of their status and intentions obvious to their team-mates.6. Interpreting Signals: Agents must be able to observe and interpret pertinent
signals of status and intentions.7. Goal Negotiation: Agents Must Be Able to Engage in Goal Negotiation8. Collaboration Support technologies for planning and autonomy must enable a
collaborative approach.9. Attention Management: Agents must be able to participate in managing
attention.10. Cost Control: All team members must help control the costs of coordinated
activity.
2010 Department of Information Systems
Consider principles behind Distributed Cognitive Systems
Ed Hutchins + others (1995+):1. knowledge possessed by members of
the cognitive system is both highly variable and redundant
2. Individuals working together on a collaborative task possess different kinds of knowledge, will engage in interactions that will allow them to pool the various resources to accomplish their tasks.
ref Rogers (1997)
2010 Department of Information Systems
Distributed Cognitive Systems (2)
3. Distributing and sharing access and knowledge enables the coordination of expectations to emerge which in turn form the basis of coordinated action
ref Rogers (1997)
2010 Department of Information Systems
Building System Resilience Three meanings (Zeiba et al, 2009):
1. foresight and avoidance of events
2. reaction to events
3. recovery from occurrence of events.
2010 Department of Information Systems
Recovery from occurrence of (unanticipated) events
“[Affordances allow] for a common representation for the opportunities of action between the automated system and its environment.”
2010 Department of Information Systems
Can Cog Sys provide leverage?
Rasmussen and Vicente developed and refined ‘Cognitive Work Analysis’ (CWA)
Focus was on the engineering of complex, time-critical H-M systems that exploit human decision making effectively during ‘normal’ operation (i.e. predictable situations) the occurrence of unpredictable events (often
emergency situations) Goal was to provide a framework for
resilient systems designanalytical tools & design tools (e.g., EID)
2010 Department of Information Systems
Cognitive Engineering With Lintern’s (2009) modifications to
include RPD, the CWA ‘outcomes’ to be focussed on includingAbstraction-Decomposition Space
(affordance and constraint mapping of a work system)
Contextual Activity Matrices (desired and potential spans of action)
Decision Ladder(s) (potential strategies)
2010 Department of Information Systems
One potential approach Utilise Abstraction Hierarchy & related
Work Domain Analysis as a basis for a shared ‘system’ model
Development of shared system representation (interface) that Can be understood, interrogated, acted
upon by humans, agents, robots efficiently
2010 Department of Information Systems
In other wordsDevelop a specification of a human–agent-robot
shared representation (interface) supporting affordance based communication, that
can be directly ("efficiently") perceived by H-A-R
can be used as a basis for coordinated H-A-R action
as a means of collaboratively and dynamically 'resolving degrees of freedom in the work system' in unanticipated situations.
2010 Department of Information Systems
10 Challenges Redux Potentially addresses
Challenge 5 (Revealing Status and Intentions): Agents must be able to make pertinent aspects of their status and intentions obvious to their team-mates.
Challenge 6 (Interpreting Signals): Agents
must be able to observe and interpret pertinent signals of status and intentions.
2010 Department of Information Systems
Research approach1. Take a candidate H-A-R or H-A system
1. human-in-the-loop simulation1. e.g., MIL-C2 DSS in some of the R-CAST
work2. must be able to introduce unanticipated
events2. develop mechanics of integration and
human- + agent- interface(s)3. integrate the proposed model into said
simulation4. run experiments versus control
(original)
2010 Department of Information Systems
Other ideas inspired by HART
BW4T – is that a possible candidate micro-world?
NIFTI search and rescue workaugments? user-centred development
work
2010 Department of Information Systems
What I want from HART Redux
learn what interesting and relevant work is out there
guidance for next steps in the PhDPlease don’t tell me to quit!Focus . . .
look for opportunities for collaboration
2010 Department of Information Systems
A Related Approach . . . ?
Johnson , Bradshaw et al (2010) “Coactivity” & Interdependence
“Critical design feature of HR system is ‘the underlying interdependence of joint
activity’”
closely following this work . . . think there is ‘common ground’
2010 Department of Information Systems
Questions, comments?