This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Describing and Probing Complex System Behavior: A Graphical Approach
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published September 11, 2001 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
Hands-on training and operation is generally considered the primary means that a user of a complex system will use to build a mental model of how that system works. However, accidents abound where a major contributing factor was user disorientation/misorientation with respect to the automation behavior, even when the operator was a seasoned user. This paper presents a compact graphical method that can be used to describe system operation, where the system may be composed of interacting automation and/or human entities. The fundamental goal of the model is to capture and present critical interactive aspects of a complex system in an integrated, intuitive fashion. This graphical approach is applied to an actual military helicopter system, using the onboard hydraulic leak detection/isolation system as a testbed. The helicopter Flight Manual is used to construct the system model, whose components include: logical structure (waiting and checking states, transitional events and conditions), human/automation cross communication (messages, information sources), and automation action and associated action limits. Using this model, examples of the following types of mode confusion are identified in the military helicopter case study: 1) Unintended side effects, 2) Indirect mode transitions, 3) Inconsistent behavior, 4) Ambiguous interfaces, and 5) Lack of appropriate feedback. The model also facilitates analysis and revision of emergency procedures, which is demonstrated using an actual set of procedures.
CitationBachelder, E. and Leveson, N., "Describing and Probing Complex System Behavior: A Graphical Approach," SAE Technical Paper 2001-01-2646, 2001, https://doi.org/10.4271/2001-01-2646.
- Bachelder, E. Leveson, N. A Graphical Language for Describing Complex System Behavior: Applications to Design Training and User Operation, 20 tth Digital Avionics and Systems Conference Oct 14–18 Daytona Beach, FL
- Carroll, J.M. Olson, J.R. 1988 Mental Models in Human-Computer Interaction Helander M. Elsevier Science Publishers 45 65
- Degani, A. 1994 Modeling Human-Machine Errors: on Modes, Errors and Patterns of Interaction Atlanta, GA Georgia Institute of Technology
- Flach, J.M. Dominguez, C.O. 1995 Use-centered design Ergonomics in Design July 19
- Javaux, D. 1998 An Algorithmic Method for Predicting Pilot-Mode Interaction Difficulties 17 th Digital Avionics and Systems Conference Oct 31 Bellevue, WA
- Javaux, D. De Keyser, V. 1998 The cognitive complexity of Pilot-Mode Interaction Boy G. Graeber C. Proceedings of the International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction in Aeronautics May 27 Montreal, Canada
- Leveson, N. 2000 Completeness in Formal Specification Language Design for Process Control Systems Proceedings of Formal Methods in Software Practice
- Leveson, N. 1995 Safeware: System Safety and Computers Addison-Wesley New York
- Leveson, N 1997 Analyzing Software Specifications for Mode Confusion Potential presented at the Workshop on Human Error and System Development Glasgow March
- Leveson, N Palmer, E (NASA Ames Research Center) 1997 Designing Automation to Reduce Operator Errors Proceedings of Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Conference October
- Rasmussen, J. 1998 Designing to Support Adaptation Hurecon, Denmark
- Rodriguez, M. et. al 2000 Identifying Mode Confusion Potential in Software Design Digital Aviation Systems Conference October
- Woods, D. Shattuck, L. Distant Supervision – Local Action Given the Potential for Surprise