A literature review on the levels of automation during the years. What are the different taxonomies that have been proposed?

Vagia, Marialena; Transeth, Aksel Andreas; Fjerdingen, Sigurd Aksnes

doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2015.09.013

Cited by 197 publications

(136 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

133

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Level of Autonomy. To highlight what we mean with level of autonomy, and the difference between automation and autonomy, we relate to the literature review on this topic performed by Vagia, Transeth, and Fjerdingen (2016). Vagia et al (2016) have presented a proposed taxonomy for level of autonomy, from fully manual control to autonomous stage, where the human to different degrees are part of the decision process and information flow.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To highlight what we mean with level of autonomy, and the difference between automation and autonomy, we relate to the literature review on this topic performed by Vagia, Transeth, and Fjerdingen (2016). Vagia et al (2016) have presented a proposed taxonomy for level of autonomy, from fully manual control to autonomous stage, where the human to different degrees are part of the decision process and information flow. Based on a literature review of the evolution of the term "level of automation" from the 1950s until now, they have described their interpretation of autonomy as: "autonomous systems can make a choice free from outside influence since they have some perceivable notion of "free will", and autonomy is the ability of the system to change its initially programmed way of action, to the degree that it has been decided a priori by the designer of the system."…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on a literature review of the evolution of the term "level of automation" from the 1950s until now, they have described their interpretation of autonomy as: "autonomous systems can make a choice free from outside influence since they have some perceivable notion of "free will", and autonomy is the ability of the system to change its initially programmed way of action, to the degree that it has been decided a priori by the designer of the system." Vagia et al (2016) have further described their interpretation of automation as:…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Systems Engineering Assessment of Emergency Disconnect System from the User Perspective

Kjørstad

Falk

2018

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper assesses the decision‐making process for activation of the Emergency Disconnect Systems (EDS) on offshore rigs in the oil and gas domain. The industry strives to evolve to a higher level of autonomy. At the same time, the standards and regulations are falling behind. The objective of this paper is to investigate the knowledge gap in engineering requirements for a future autonomous decision‐making system. We have interviewed key personnel with operational experience from Dynamic Positioning (DP) rigs operating on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS), and a specialist engineer from a global supplier of offshore workover systems. The standards currently applied to design the EDS, are mainly providing procedures. To evolve to a higher level of autonomy, we suggest that designers consider the socio‐technical elements and relations of the EDS. The ISO9241‐210 standard can contribute with a human‐centered design approach as a supplement to the existing engineering approach.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Systems Engineering Assessment of Emergency Disconnect System from the User Perspective

Kjørstad

Falk

2018

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the complexities of human cognitive processing, as demonstrated in the principles of naturalistic decision making, many of these models apply a simplified, sequential model. For a thorough review, see Vagia et al [52].…”

Section: Research Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Level of Automation in Emergency Quick Disconnect Decision Making

Imset

Falk

Kjørstad

et al. 2018

JMSE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a key measure for safety and environmental protection during offshore well operations, drill rigs are equipped with Emergency Quick Disconnect (EQD) systems. However, an EQD operation is in itself considered a risky operation with a major economic impact. For this reason, it is of great importance to aid the operators in their assessment of the situation at all times, and help them make the best decisions. However, despite the availability of such systems, accidents do happen. This demonstrates the vulnerability of our human decision-making capabilities in extremely stressful situations. One way of improving the overall human-system performance with respect to EQD is to increase the level and quality of the automation and decision support systems. Although there is plenty of evidence that automated systems have weaknesses, there is also evidence that advanced software systems outperform humans in complex decision-making. The major challenge is to make sure that EQD is performed when necessary, but there is also a need to decrease the number of false EQDs. This paper applies an existing framework for levels of automation in order to explore the critical decision process leading to an EQD. We provide an overview of the benefits and drawbacks of existing automation and decision support systems vs. manual human decision-making. Data are collected from interviews of offshore users, suppliers, and oil companies, as well as from formal operational procedures. Findings are discussed using an established framework for the level of automation. Our conclusion is that there is an appropriate level of automation in critical situations related to the loss of the position of the drill rig, and that there is the promising potential to increase the autonomy level in a mid-and long-term situation assessment.

show abstract

“…The levels of autonomy for a system can be defined for various aspects of the system and categorised according to several taxonomies [20]. Regarding the external system independence for snake robots, we introduce the following autonomy levels (AL) according to gradually increased complexity:…”

Section: The Alfus Framework For Snake Robot Perception-driven Obstacmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perception-Driven Obstacle-Aided Locomotion for Snake Robots: The State of the Art, Challenges and Possibilities †

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In nature, snakes can gracefully traverse a wide range of different and complex environments. Snake robots that can mimic this behaviour could be fitted with sensors and transport tools to hazardous or confined areas that other robots and humans are unable to access. In order to carry out such tasks, snake robots must have a high degree of awareness of their surroundings (i.e., perception-driven locomotion) and be capable of efficient obstacle exploitation (i.e., obstacle-aided locomotion) to gain propulsion. These aspects are pivotal in order to realise the large variety of possible snake robot applications in real-life operations such as fire-fighting, industrial inspection, search-and-rescue, and more. In this paper, we survey and discuss the state of the art, challenges, and possibilities of perception-driven obstacle-aided locomotion for snake robots. To this end, different levels of autonomy are identified for snake robots and categorised into environmental complexity, mission complexity, and external system independence. From this perspective, we present a step-wise approach on how to increment snake robot abilities within guidance, navigation, and control in order to target the different levels of autonomy. Pertinent to snake robots, we focus on current strategies for snake robot locomotion in the presence of obstacles. Moreover, we put obstacle-aided locomotion into the context of perception and mapping. Finally, we present an overview of relevant key technologies and methods within environment perception, mapping, and representation that constitute important aspects of perception-driven obstacle-aided locomotion.

show abstract

A literature review on the levels of automation during the years. What are the different taxonomies that have been proposed?

Cited by 197 publications

References 25 publications

A Systems Engineering Assessment of Emergency Disconnect System from the User Perspective

A Systems Engineering Assessment of Emergency Disconnect System from the User Perspective

The Level of Automation in Emergency Quick Disconnect Decision Making

Perception-Driven Obstacle-Aided Locomotion for Snake Robots: The State of the Art, Challenges and Possibilities †

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About