ALBERT

Description: A human-in-the-loop experiment was conducted at the NASA Ames Research Center Vertical Motion Simulator, where instrument-rated pilots completed a simulated terminal descent phase of a lunar landing. Ten pilots participated in a 2 x 2 mixed design experiment, with level of automation as the within-subjects factor and failure frequency as the between subjects factor. The two evaluated levels of automation were high (fully automated landing) and low (manual controlled landing). During test trials, participants were exposed to either a high number of failures (75% failure frequency) or low number of failures (25% failure frequency). In order to investigate the pilots' sensitivity to changes in levels of automation and failure frequency, the dependent measure selected for this experiment was accuracy of failure diagnosis, from which D Prime and Decision Criterion were derived. For each of the dependent measures, no significant difference was found for level of automation and no significant interaction was detected between level of automation and failure frequency. A significant effect was identified for failure frequency suggesting failure frequency has a significant effect on pilots' sensitivity to failure detection and diagnosis. Participants were more likely to correctly identify and diagnose failures if they experienced the higher levels of failures, regardless of level of automation

Description: NASA's Human Research Program (HRP) funds research efforts aimed at mitigating various human health and performance risks, including the Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI). As such, within HRP, the Human Factors and Behavioral Performance (HFBP) Element tasked an evaluation of future HARI needs in order to scope and focus the HARI risk research plan. The objective was to provide a systematic understanding of the critical factors associated with effective HARI that will be necessary to achieve the future mission goals for near- and deep-space exploration. Future mission goals are specified by NASA Design Reference Missions (DRMs) that are pertinent to the HRP. The outcome of this evaluation is a set of NASA-relevant HARI tasks, factors, and interactions required for exploration-class missions.

Description: In 2017, our team investigated and evaluated the novel concept of operations of astronaut self-scheduling (rescheduling their own timeline without creating violations) onboard International Space Station (ISS). Five test sessions were completed for this technology demonstration called Crew Autonomous Scheduling Test (CAST). For the first time in a spaceflight operational environment, an ISS crewmember planned, rescheduled, and executed their activities in real-time on a mobile device while abiding by flight and scheduling constraints. This paper discusses the lessons learned from deployment to execution.

Description: As the agency focuses on lunar missions, it is important to revisit the human factors and behavioral performance (HFBP) challenges for long duration exploration missions. We outline the important factors from the Apollo program, the long duration experience gained onboard International Space Station (ISS), and HFBP research applicable to exploration-class missions.

Description: Within the Human Research Program, one risk delineates the uncertainty surrounding crew working with automation and robotics in spaceflight. The Risk of Inadequate Design of Human and Automation/Robotic Integration (HARI) is concerned with the detrimental effects on crew performance due to ineffective user interfaces, system designs and/or functional task allocation, potentially compromising mission success and safety. Risk arises because we have limited experience with complex automation and robotics. One key gap within HARI, is the gap related to functional allocation. The gap states: We need to evaluate, develop, and validate methods and guidelines for identifying human-automation/robot task information needs, function allocation, and team composition for future long duration, long distance space missions. Allocations determine the human-system performance as it identifies the functions and performance levels required by the automation/robotic system, and in turn, what work the crew is expected to perform and the necessary human performance requirements. Allocations must take into account each of the human, automation, and robotic systems capabilities and limitations. Some functions may be intuitively assigned to the human versus the robot, but to optimize efficiency and effectiveness, purposeful role assignments will be required. The role of automation and robotics will significantly change in future exploration missions, particularly as crew becomes more autonomous from ground controllers. Thus, we must understand the suitability of existing function allocation methods within NASA as well as the existing allocations established by the few robotic systems that are operational in spaceflight. In order to evaluate future methods of robotic allocations, we must first benchmark the allocations and allocation methods that have been used. We will present 1) documentation of human-automation-robotic allocations in existing, operational spaceflight systems; and 2) To gather existing lessons learned and best practices in these role assignments, from spaceflight operational experience of crew and ground teams that may be used to guide development for future systems. NASA and other space agencies have operational spaceflight experience with two key Human-Automation-Robotic (HAR) systems: heavy lift robotic arms and planetary robotic explorers. Additionally, NASA has invested in high-fidelity rover systems that can carry crew, building beyond Apollo's lunar rover. The heavy lift robotic arms reviewed are: Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS), Japanese Remote Manipulator System (JEMRMS), and the European Robotic Arm (ERA, designed but not deployed in space). The robotic rover systems reviewed are: Mars Exploration Rovers, Mars Science Laboratory rover, and the high-fidelity K10 rovers. Much of the design and operational feedback for these systems have been communicated to flight controllers and robotic design teams. As part of the mitigating the HARI risk for future human spaceflight operations, we must document function allocations between robots and humans that have worked well in practice.

Description: We have investigated and evaluated a novel concept of operations for human spaceflight: allowing astronauts to manage and schedule their own timeline. In order to evaluate this self-scheduling concept of operations, we have designed, implemented, and field-tested astronaut-centric planning and scheduling aid. Our mobile-based software aid, Playbook, has been used in a variety of Earth analogs as well as onboard the International Space Station. We will demonstrate the unique Playbook features that we have developed based on research findings during field testing that facilitate planning and scheduling in extreme environments.