Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
S~S~ SPRY We can follow our dreams to distant stars, living arm working in Space for peaceful economic arm scientific gain. Tonight, I am directing MESA to develop a permanently Banned Space Station arxI to do it within a decade. President Ronald Reagan, State of the Union Message, January 5, 1984. In response to this presidential mandate, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is plan m ng to launch a nations space station in the early 1990s. To implement this commitment, and in concurrence with a congressional mandate, NASA is focusing serious attention on the use of autcmation an] robotics An future space systems. There its a tendency, particularly in the public sector, to view the emergence of new computer capabilities and automation and robotic technologies as a basis for replacing humans in space and thereby avoiding tragedies such as those of the Apollo 7 and the Challenger. However, it is unlikely that artificial intelligence ccmparable to human Intelligence will be available to replace humans *tiring the last part of the twentieth Century and the e ply part of the bwen~y-first. m erefore,-people and automated systems will work together An space for the foreseeable future. NA5A is plan m ng new research programs aimed at acquiring a better under standing of how computers, automation, and robotics can be made to work in partnership with people in complex. lona-duration scare system missions. These prc grams will address important questions concern mg the relationship between what are called intelligent systems and the people who will use them as astronauts inside a space vehicle and in extravehicular activities, as scientists an] technicians in space and on the grcunS, and as controllers on the ground. Space offers significant challenges for the exploration and demonstration of humanrec==uter-rcbot cooperation. . it, _ , _ ~ _ _ _, _ ,, _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ Recognizing the size, complexity, and importance of this challenge, the Aeronautics and Space Technology Office approached the Committee on Human Factors for assistance. The specific question posed was '~hat research is, or should be, going on now that might produce new ~nologies that could, or Should be, integrated into the space station after its initial Operating c~paci~r has been est~hlished?" me committee responded to NASA's question by proposing to assemble a group of eminent scientists . 1
2 Arms this issue and to present its vim deco the community by mans of a symposium on human factors rearm new= advance Space station design. DEVECD~ OF LIE SYMPOSIUM The Oc~mittee on Oman Factors initially for~d a small Staring Group ~ of six resorters representing a broad range of relevant disciplines (i.e., human factors, artificial Intelligence, expert systems, decision science, robotics and Presence, and social science and space system design). The steering group was introduced to the task at hand through briefings from various Nabs headquarters offices, including the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology and the Space Station Office. Based on the information gathered during these briefings, the steering group then developed the following list of symposium topics and questions for consideration by prospective · System Prc~uctivity/People and Machines How can human performance and productivity be def mea? How can system productivity be measured and evaluated? Expert Systems and Robotics and Their Use What are the requirements for reliability? How can people, expert systems, and robots form an effective partnership? Language and Displays for Human-Computer Communication How much structure does a cc mputer language need? What types of displays are most effective? l~nr-~nc~ ones ~~r~r;~'v ~nntml . at are the relative merits of various telepresence displays? (e.g., touch or sterecpsis) What can be done to increase the precision of control for remote manipulators? · Computer-Aided Monitoring and Decision Mixing What types of rout~r.e operations cowld be automated? ~ How will people use these types of aids? · Social Factors What factors affect group productivity and performance? What are the potential effects of increased crew diversity with respect to such variables as gender, professional training, and interest differences? Human Role in Space How should system functions be allocated in manned space systems? Who or what instrumental ity should take ultimate responsibility for system performance arxl safety, or a c~uter? a human
3 The general framework for the sy~si~n was planned as follows. Eadh topic area would constitute a different session. Eadh session would consist of two formal preserltations of papers prepared especially for ache sy ~ osimn and would be followed by a formal c ~ nentary on the papers by a preassigned discussant and would conclude with an open discussion. Members of the audience would be active participants and would be selected with this in mind. The steeping group identified and recruited three excerts in each ~ ~_~ ~ =~= ~ 4~ =~ _A ~ Ale: Be_ ~ AA A: ~~,~ =~1- o~c=. owe =~1= I'm ~ ~ Q ly~e~ -1~1~- The session on system productivity was an exception, having one author and one discussant. Before the symposium, all the prospective authors and discussants were invited to visit the Lyndon Johnson Space Center for briefings and discussions with key personnel involved in manned space flight research and development. Speakers and advisors were present from NASA headquarters, the Johnson Space Center, the Ames Research Center, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. Fo1 lowing the extensive overview of NASA research efforts aimed at the space station effort provided by NASA personnel, symposium authors and discussants began preparing materials for the symposium. ~ndividn~s involved in each session worked together using an iterative peer review and revision approach in writing the papers and the formal c~tary on there that was to be include In the symposium p~i~s. Eadh Coup took responsibility for the completeness arm t~hni~1 accuracy of the material representing its area of e~rti~. Prior to the sy~simn, authors and discussants received a complete set of papers and c ~ nentary for each of the sessions. The symposium was held at the Nations ~ ademy of Sciences on January 29-30, 1987. Following the symposium, authors were asked to revise their papers and to suggest revisions to papers written by others based on the information and insights gained during the sy~os] ~- lhe starring group did not consider its mandate to encompass the task of developing specific research recc==endations for NASA. m e symposium presentations an] commentary serve that purpose. However, the closing remarks of the keynote speaker and the chairs which appear at the end of these p q s, stand ~~ their personal interpretation of what was said that was the most important. S~S~ ABSTRACTS This section summarizes the contents of each of the symposium papers and provides the interested reaper with an overview of the symposium program. System Productivity: People and Machines The concept of productivity, while elusive, has been an important one ~ economics and engineering psychology arm is frequently enc~ount~red in discussions Activity in the Space Station (Raymorx] S. Nickerson)
4 of the space program and of the space station in particular. Nickerson begins with a discussion of what productivity means and how it has been assessed in earth environments. Several variables that have been shown to affect it are identified. Factors that are likely to have an impact on productivity in space are discussed, with emphasis on a variety of stressors that may be expecter to characterize the space station environment. The paper ends with a set of recommendations for Ah. Expert Systems and Their Use AI Systems in the Space Station (Thomas M. Mitchell) Among the technologies that will help shape life in the space station, artificial intelligence (AI) seems certa m to play a major role. The striking complexity of the station, its life support systems, and the manufacturing and scientific apparatus it will house ~ e that a good share of its supervision, maintenance, and control be done by cc mputer. At the same time, the noon for intelligent communication and shared responsibility between such computer programs and space station residents poses a serious challenge to present interface= between people and machines. Hence, the potential and need for contributions fern AI to the space station effort are great. This paper suggests areas in which support for new AI research might be expected to produce a significant impact on future space station technology. The paper focuses on two areas of particular significance to the space effort: (1) the use of knowledge-based systems for monitoring and controlling the space station and (2) issue= related to sharing and transferring responsibility between computers and space station residents. Expert Systems: Applications in Space (Bruce C. Buchanan) The technology of artificial intelligence (AI), specifically expert syst ~c, -is reviewed to examine what capabilities exist and what research nook-= to be conducted to facilitate the integration of humans and AI technology in future space systems. An expert system is defined as a flexible, symbolic reasoning program that uses heuristic to manipulate symbolic data ~ ord=' to generate plausible answers to questions. Four goals are identified for expert systems: (1) performance (at a standard comparable to the best specialists); (2) reasoning (as opposed to straight "number crunching"; (3) understandability (the ability to explain why an answer is plausible and how it was generated); and (4) flexibility (the ability to de=1 with novel situations). Phonologic techniques for achieving these goals are discussed, including modularity (keeping domain knowledge separate from decision rules, and independent clusters of domain knowledge separate from one another) and uniformity of language and constructs (both internally between segments of the program, and externally between the program and the intended users). The problems of collecting, representing, storing, maintaining, and manipulating
5 dc main knowledge are retie wed. Buchanan concludes that existing expert system technology is adequate for some problems but can be improved to use the very large knowledge bases required by a system as complex as .the space station. Language and Displays for Human-Comput~' Communication Change in Human-Cc mputer Interfaces on the Space Station (Philip J. Hayes) The planned longevity of the space station will require mc~ularitY in its design to allow components to be chanced and undated _ , _ _ _ _, _ it, _ as independently of one another as possible. _ ~ ~ 3. This paper explores the issue of Parity in the design of human-computer interfaces for the space station. The need for mc~NIarity centers on the rapid rate of expansion in the kinds and combinations of modalities (typing, graphics, pointing, speech, etc.) available for human-co mputar interaction, and on the technique= available to effect their implementation and interaction. The paper assesses the appropriateness of current and forthcoming modalities according to task, user, and space station environment. human-computer ~nterfa~-= inevitable for the space station is the development of ~nt=~ligent interfaces. m e paper discusses methods of achieving ~nt=1ligence in ~nterfa~-= and in what circumstances it is desirable. m e question of how to achieve the n4-o~c~ry changes in human-oompuOer ~nterfa~-= is considered, focusing on methods of obtaining a clean separation between the interface and the underly Meg space station system application. User interface management systems and interaction interface development environments are also addressed. m e paper concludes with a set of research recommendation_ cover mg both research into new interface technology and methods for dealing with the consequent need for change An interfaces. A secondary factor that mixes chance in . . · . Cognitive Factors in the Design and Development of Software in the Space Station (Peter G. Polson) m e paper describes major problems in the design of human-computer interfaces for systems on the space station arm Box has Static application of Id arm theoretic=] results and methodologies from captive psychology arm cognitive science can lead to the develc~nt of interface= that reduce training cost arm ~nc:e space station crew pra~tivi=. me paper focuses an fair issues: (1) transfer of ever sJcilis; (2) comprehension of complex visual displays; (3) hLman-oomputer problem solving; and (4) management of the development of untie systems. - ~ . . . Four solutions to the pro blame are proposed: (1) `:c. of information process Meg models of tasks in the design process; (2) allocation of adequate resources to user-~nterfa-= development; (3) use of user interface management systems; and (4) use of existing expertise in NEST.
6 Computer-Aide] Mom boring and Decision Making Robustness and Transparency ~ Intelligent Systems (Randall Davis) Building and operating a manned space station will give rise to problems of enormous complexity in an environment that is both hostile and unfamiliar. The complexity of the station and the novelty of the environment preclude ache creation of an exhaustive list of contingency pus. Unforeseen events will inevitably occur, requiring rPal-time interpretation, diagnosis, arx] response. The paper reviews the failure of a fuel cell during the second space Shuttle mission In order to give an exanq?le of the kind of unanticipated event that can occur and examines the varieties of knowledge and engineering reasoning required to deal with such an event. Davis considers what Bight be required to have a computer assist in this task by giving it an understanding of "how something works". Scme nonsolutions to the problem are discussed to demonstrate why existing technology is insufficient, and several research themes are then explored. The nature an] character of engineering models are considered and it is suggested that their creation, selection, and simplification are key issues in the sort of understanding that should be created. Recalling the difficulties involve] in the capture of Solar Max, the paper argues for the necessity of complete design capture an] speculates about what it would take to create a design capture system so effective that it would be was almost unthinkable to create or modify a design without it. The paper also considers what can be done at the design stage to create models that are easier to use and more effective; that is, how to design in such a fashion that interpretation, diagnosis, and ~ onse are made less complex protests. Decision MEXir<--i~ded and Unaided (Baruch Fischhoff) There are few aspects of space station design and operation that do not involve some decision making, whether it be choosing critical pieces of equipment, choosing to trust automated systems, choosing where to look first for the source of an apparent anomaly, or choosing the range of conditions for pre-m~ssion testing. Showing how people intuitively make such decisions praises a basis for de~mini~ where they need help, in the form of autcmat=~ decision aids, specialized training, or designs that are robust in the face of fallible decision making. Although it has much in common with decision making in other contexts, space station decision making presents some special demands. These include: (1) the need to create a shared model of the space station and its support systems, which will coordinate the widely distributed decision makers capable of affecting its performance; (2) the need to make decisions with imperfect systems, whose current status and future behavior are ~ncc~mplet~ly understood; (3) the need to make novel decisions, r~por~ir~ to nonrwLine situations. The human factors ~e3~ needs in each of these areas are identified, using as a point of departure the li~a~cure of behavior decision theory. Meeting these Canards
7 will require the sort of programmatic research effort that has distinguished NOVA in the past. Telepresence and Supervisory Control Teleoperation, Telepresence, and Telerobotics (Thomas B. Sheridan) The problems of integrating humans and automated or robotic systems in space environments are discussed, begins ng with brief definitions of key terms like Operation, telepresen~=, telerobotics, and supervisory control. The early development of t~leoperators is s~mnarized, freon tile cable m~haru~1 earth-~vir~ arxt constellation equipment available prior to 1945, to the industrial riots, equipped with pr;,n;ti~re cater vision, wrist force sensing, arxt "tech percent" condom boxes that were ~ use by the early 1980s. The current shady= of ~celepperator devel~nt is evaluated, arm ltifingered manipulators, touch sensing, and depth perception are cited as areas in which promising r~r~ is Burring. A need is identified for a formal theory of manipulation to guide the develc~nt of h~narl-madhine iced sensory-motor Control systems. Research needs are identified in Be following areas: ~ . .. ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ . .. . (1) telesensing (LnClUOlng resolved force, Ouch, ~Inestnesls' p~-~riooeption, and proximity); (2) Actuating (including mLlti-degree-o=-freedom end offer twc-arm interaction, and multiperson cooperative control of t~leoperators); (3) human-oomputer interaction in a computer-aided environment (including simulation, plan m ng/decision-aiding, and cc=~an~/oommunication/control). It is concluded that research in the ares discussed is critical for the development of t~leoFerator/telerobotic capabilities, which will permit the best relative use of both human and machine resource in future space systems. Telerobakics for the Evolving Space Station (Lawrence Stark) In this paper, telerobotics ~ used to mean remote control of robots by a human operator using supervisory and some direct control. by robot is meant a manipulator/mcbili~r device with visual or o~thPr senses. This is an important area for the evolving NASA space station. . ~ . . . . . . . The paper suggests that triplicate or he way plarmir~ behold be employed. It is important to carry out r~r~ to accomplish tasks: (1) with people alone, if Edible, such as In eXera-v~hi~tlar activities; (2) with autonc~s robots (AR); and (3) wiff~=lercibotics. py~arir~gar~ contrasting the r ~ r ~ necessary to carry out these three approaches, present problems may be clarified. m e paper describes an experimental telercbotics simulation suitable for studying human operator performance. Simple manipulator pick-an5-place and tracking tasks allowed quantitative comparison of a number of calligraphic display view m g conditions. The Ames-R='keley enhanced perspective display was utilized in conjunction with an experimental helmet mounted display system. A number of control modes could be compared in this Robotics simulation, including
8 displa~nt, rate, and a~leratory control using position and force joysticks. ~nicati~ delay was induced to study its effect on performance . The paper suggests that the in In and support for teler~botics reseal t~l~y Uphold ~ f~ NINA and fen private iffy and that such r~ cadd also be corded, with short farm NASA, university laboratories. Social Factors In ~uctivi~ and Performance Social Stress, ~*~3iated Fornication System, arm dean uctivi~ In Soace Stations (Karen S. Cook) the Darer has two distinct but related foci. First, it considers the issue of stress and reviews the social psychological literature relater str~#;s to individual and Group furmbionir~. Prey attention is focused on the link between stress and group pr reactivity. 1 ~ parer identifies promising lines of research in the social sciences and poses issues that might be of particular interest to NOVA for future research. Second, the paper considers a broad class of problems that arise frog the fact that life aloft requires, almost exclusively, mediated communication systems. m is section of the paper addresses the psychological and social aspects of mediated communication (primarily, computer-mediated communication systems) and its impact on individual anS group performance or productivity. The concluding section of the paper proposes a critical set of redry nods that NASA might take Rations for pr~tic ~r=. These camplement r~r~ currently being supports }: y Ned' s dean Factors Division. Isis is placed on what are tern critical dial contingencies, narrowly, these psychological and Biological ads of life as ~isionect on space stations that, if not managed well organizationally, card create major problems for crew productivity and viability ~ space. Control, Conflict, and Crisis Management in the Space Station's Social System [H. Andrew Michener) The paper discusses two social systems: (1) the space station social system in the year 1993 and (2) the space station social system as it may have evolved by the your 2000. Because neither of these social systems exists today, they cannot be investigated by empirical techniques; thus, the discussion in this paper is necec=~'ily theoretical and conjecturale It is proposed that the y ~ r 2000 social system, ~ contrast with the 1993 system, will be larger in size and more differentiated in composition, will make greater ,,== of on-board computerization (artificial intelligence), and will pursue different goals and subgoals. Thick changes will, in turn, create a year 2000 social system that is more complex, more differentiated into subgroups, and more decentralized with regard to decision making than the year 1993 system. It is suggested that several consequences will follow from increases In complexity, differentiation, and decentralization. Specifically, it is likely that: (l) the supervisory-control system on board the space station
9 will shift freon a hit form to a Metrical form; (2) the potential for, arxi severity of, Personal conflict will be greater; at (3) the logistics of r~rxling k, crises will be different. Eadh of these points is di ~ used In detail. The paper closes with suggestions regarding research that might usefully be conducted today in anticipation of these changes. m e Human Role An Space Systems The Role= of Humans and Machines in Space {David L. Akin) The fundamental requirements for any sPlf-conta~ned device performing a useful function in space are identified as follows: (1) sensation (the ability to detect objects); (2) computation (the Ability to formulate a plan of action); (3) manipulation (the ability to interact with, and to alter, the environment); (4) locc motion (the ability to maneuver within ~ he Or;_ ~ · fed cam__ If_<. ~_1 ;~ ~~ ~ ~ ~_1~ GllV''V~-J ~ \-J IVY W' t WV C~~J · ~ e ~ t a ~ present roles of human and mechanical systems in fulfilling these functions in space activities are reviewed, with emphasis on the special contributions of people to the performance of space systems. The need to take an earthlike environment into space in order to accommodate humans is also dis~==P~, including the constraints of atmosphere, consumables, volume, work cycles, and gravity. It is concluded that there will continue to be necessary and sufficient roles for both humans and machines in space systems for the forpc==~hle future. Research needs are identified in the following areas: (1) development of a Meaningful data base on human and machine capabilities and limitations in space envircrments; (2) identification of appropriate roles for humans and machines in space systems; (3) development of appropriate metrics of human and machine performance; and (4) an a~-=sment of anthrcpocentrism (the tendency to design autonomous machines based on a human model). Sharing Cognitive Tasks Between people and computers ~ Space Systems (William H. Starbuck) m e differences between people and computers are persistent and profound. Although computers' capabilities have been develc ping rapidly, computer simulation of human thought has had little success. However, the differences between people and computers suggest that oombinations of the two can achieve results beyond the capabilities of each alone. For that reason, N~;A Should decree rash to i~prwing the interactions arm synergies between pe - le arm of. Nearly all the r~r~ an h~n~er interaction has focus on pence ho lack thorough training arxt who had little experience with ~ s. Since rest of these findings may not extrapolate to He well-trained and experience operators of space systems, there is need for studies of such users. Five research topics seem especially interesting and important: (~) fostering trust between people and expert systems; (2) creating useful workloads; (3) anticipating human errors; (4) developing effective interface languages; and (5) using
10 ni~1 interface metaphors. Inherent in these topics is an implication bat Nab dhalld develop? a user interface management system that will recognize the needs of diff~nt users, allay ctiff~nt users express Choir personal prefererx:es, are prod: users' individuality. age paper ccrx:ludes that to 3~nprc~re the quality of designs arxt to improve users' at of designs, e~perien~ astronauts and controllers ~ participate in He Aligning of ~n~rfaces and systems.
