Pioneering steps towards future human-robotic operations performance

S. Hosseini*, J. Smisek, M. Landgraf, T. Krueger, S. Lizy-Destrez, F. Dehais

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Conference proceedings/Edited volumeConference contributionScientificpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Future human spaceflight exploration missions to the Moon and beyond are hypothesised to benefit from human-robotic integrated operations. The European Space Agency focuses on preparing these operations, following the objective stated in the Global Exploration Roadmap of the International Space Exploration Coordination Group. Currently, human-robotic operations aim at technology development and demonstration, yet essential questions that remain unanswered are: How can human performance be measured, and which metrics are used? This contribution aims at answering this by preparing a pilot phase focusing on human performance assessment for subjects controlling a rover. A recent study by Hosseini (2016) for ESA identified essential knowledge gaps that must be filled to assess astronaut performance for tele-operations, which is of great importance for future missions since they affect mission planning, task allocation and even tool selection. In this regard, this study proposes follow-on research in which a tele-operations experiment is conducted by driving a rover, in order to evaluate human performance in tele-operations. In the previous study, two space-to-ground and multiple ground-to-ground tele-operations experiments were analysed in which subjects controlled a rover. Data analysis studied the command time and execution time of the assigned tasks, i.e. the time it takes for the human to give the command to the rover and the time it takes for the rover to execute its tasks, respectively. Results showed that the main challenge for performance assessment is the lack of recorded parameters. The logged data is limited only to time values and success/failure results and it does not specify performance variations. Furthermore, the study concludes that many different sub-tasks were performed in a limited amount of time, resulting in scarce data per sub-task and limiting the statistical significance. Follow-on research is proposed that aims at solving for the two above mentioned issues. Firstly, the study introduces parameters, which are used to assess the performance of pilots regarding neuro-ergonomics and human factors. Secondly, an experiment is set up and is tested for its rigidity in a protocol rehearsal, prior to performing the experiment with a relatively large group of participants. It is hypothesised that this approach has the potential not only to increase the qualitative assessment of the performance, but also to increase the quantitative results essential for preparing crew training and future missions.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publication68th International Astronautical Congress, IAC 2017
Subtitle of host publicationUnlocking Imagination, Fostering Innovation and Strengthening Security
PublisherInternational Astronautical Federation, IAF
Pages5488-5495
Number of pages8
Volume8
ISBN (Print)9781510855373
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2017
Event68th International Astronautical Congress: Unlocking Imagination, Fostering Innovation and Strengthening Security, IAC 2017: Unlocking Imagination, Fostering Innovation and Strengthening Security - Adelaide, Australia
Duration: 25 Sept 201729 Sept 2017
Conference number: 68
http://www.iafastro.org/events/iac/iac-2017/

Conference

Conference68th International Astronautical Congress: Unlocking Imagination, Fostering Innovation and Strengthening Security, IAC 2017
Abbreviated titleIAC 2017
Country/TerritoryAustralia
CityAdelaide
Period25/09/1729/09/17
Internet address

Keywords

  • Analogue test
  • Human factors
  • Human-robotic operations
  • Lunar exploration
  • Neuroscience
  • Performance

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Pioneering steps towards future human-robotic operations performance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this