|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Modeling Vigilance Performance as a Complex Adaptive System
Joerg Wellbrink, Ph.D.
The MOVES Institute, Naval Postgraduate School
Mike Zyda, Ph.D.
Director, the MOVES Institute, Naval Postgraduate School
John Hiles
The MOVES Institute, Naval Postgraduate School
Current cognitive models not only lack flexibility and realism, they struggle to model individual behavior and reduced performance. We propose that reduced human performance can be best modeled as a complex adaptive system. We built a multi-agent model, "Reduced Human Performance Model (RHPM)," as a proof of principle. The simulation system realistically simulates the reduction of vigilance that individuals experience during such operations as airport screening, radar-screen operation, and other vital tasks in which attention easily flags. The developed multi-agent system generates individual behavior within a reasonable range. Its use for computer-generated forces (i.e., radar screen operator) would improve the realism of simulation systems by adding human-like reduced vigilance performance. The model represents a well suited tool to mediate between vigilance theories such as signal detection theory and experimental data. Using the model as a surrogate generates insights that potentially create likely hypotheses to improve the theories.
Key Words: Cognitive architectures human performance models vigilance complex adaptive system attention
References
- 1. Chorev, M. (Colonel, Israeli Armed Forces) 1996. Surprise Attack The Case of the Yom-Kippur War. Washington, D.C.: Industrial College of the Armed Forces.
- 2. Pew, R. W., A. S. Mavor. 1998. Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulation. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Science.
- 3. Ritter, F. E., Shadbolt, Nigel R., Elliman, David, Young, Gobet, Richard Fernand, Baxter, Gordon D. 1999. Techniques for Modeling Human Performance in Synthetic Environments: A Supplementary Review. Nottingham, UK: ESRC Centre for Research in Development, Instruction and Training, 1–92.
- 4. Tenney, Yvette, et al. 2003. The AMBR Project: A Case-Study in Human Performance Model Comparison. 2003 Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation (BRIMS). Scottsdale, AZ.
- 5. Waldrop, M. M. 1992. Complexity: the Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos. New York, NY: Touchstone.
- 6. Wellbrink, Joerg. 2003. Reduced Human Performance Modeled as a Complex Adaptive System, Dissertation MOVES Institute. Monterey, CA: Naval Postgraduate School.
- 7. Newton, I. 1729. Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/en/newton.htm. Last accessed January 2004.
- 8. Gell-Mann, M. 1994. The Quark and the Jaguar Adventures in the Simple and the Complex. New York, NY: W.J. Freemann and Company.
- 9. Arthur, W. B. 1994. Inductive Reasoning and Bounded Rationality (The El Farol Problem). Amer. Econ. Review (Papers and Proceedings).
- 10. Cowan, G. A., D. Pines, et al. 1994. Complexity: Metaphors, Models, and Reality. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
- 11. Arthur, W. B. 1999. Complexity and the Economy. Science 284, 107–109.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- 12. Grilo, Antonio, Artur Caetano, Rosa Agostinho. 2000. Immune System Simulation through a Complex Adaptive System Model, CiteSeer Scientific Literature Digital Library.
- 13. Ilachinski, A. 1997. Irreducible Semi-Autonomous Adaptive Combat (ISAAC): An Artificial-Life Approach to Land Warfare (U). Alexandria, VA: Center for Naval Analyses.
- 14. Horne, G. E., M. K. Lauren 2000. Operational Synthesis Applied to Mutual NZ/U.S. Questions. Part I. Quantico, VA: Marine Corp Combat Development Command, 1–10.
- 15. Hiles, J., M. VanPutte, et al. 2001. Innovations in Computer Generated Autonomy at the MOVES Institute. Monterey, CA: Modeling, Virtual Reality and Simulations (MOVES) Institute, Naval Postgraduate School.
- 16. Tosey, P. 2002. Teaching at the Edge of Chaos. Surrey, UK: Teaching & Learning Forum for Colleagues in the School of Educational Studies.
- 17. Matthews, G., D. Davies, et al. 2000. Human Performance Cognition, Stress and Individual Differences. East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.
- 18. Mackworth, N. H. 1950. Researches on the Measurement of Human Performance. London, UK: HMSO, Medical Research Council.
- 19. Davies, D., G. S. Tune. 1970. Human Vigilance Performance. London, UK: Trinity Press.
- 20. Davies, D., R. Parasuraman 1982. The Psychology of Vigilance. New York, NY: Academic Press.
- 21. Warm, J. 1984. Sustained Attention in Human Performance. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
- 22. McKelvey, B. 2000. Complexity Theory in Organization Science: Seizing the Promise or Becoming a Fad. Emergence 1(1), 5–32.
- 23. Wickens, C. 1992. Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. New York, NY: Harper Collins.
- 24. Wickens, C. 2002. Multiple Resources and Performance Prediction. Stanton Handbook, CA.
- 25. Costa, P. T., R. McCrae 2000. NEO Software System for Windows Manual. Odessa, FL: PAR Psychological Assessment Resources Inc.
- 26. Carley, K. M. 1996. Validating Computational Models. Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University.
- 27. Goldberg, D. E. 1989. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization & Machine Learning. New York, NY: Addison Wesley.
The Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulation: Applications, Methodology, Technology, Vol. 1, No. 1,
29-42 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/154851290400100103

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
|
|