Human performance and strategies while solving an aircraft routing and sequencing problem: an experimental approach

As airport resources are stretched to meet increasing demand for services, effective use of ground infrastructure is increasingly critical for ensuring operational efficiency. Work in operations research has produced algorithms providing airport tower controllers with guidance on optimal timings and sequences for flight arrivals, departures, and ground movement. While such decision support systems have the potential to improve operational efficiency, they may also affect users’ mental workload, situation awareness, and task performance. This work sought to identify performance outcomes and strategies employed by human decision makers during an experimental airport ground movement control task with the goal of identifying opportunities for enhancing user-centered tower control decision support systems. To address this challenge, thirty novice participants solved a set of vehicle routing problems presented in the format of a game representing the airport ground movement task practiced by runway controllers. The games varied across two independent variables, network map layout (representing task complexity) and gameplay objective (representing task flexibility), and verbal protocol, visual protocol, task performance, workload, and task duration were collected as dependent variables. A logistic regression analysis revealed that gameplay objective and task duration significantly affected the likelihood of a participant identifying the optimal solution to a game, with the likelihood of an optimal solution increasing with longer task duration and in the less flexible objective condition. In addition, workload appeared unaffected by either independent variable, but verbal protocols and visual observations indicated that high-performing participants demonstrated a greater degree of planning and situation awareness. Through identifying human behavior during optimization problem solving, the work of tower control can be better understood, which, in turn, provides insights for developing decision support systems for ground movement management

Proceedings of the fourth Resilience Engineering Symposium

These proceedings document the various presentations at the Fourth Resilience Engineering Symposium held on June 8-10, 2011, in Sophia-Antipolis, France. The Symposium gathered participants from five continents and provided them with a forum to exchange experiences and problems, and to learn about Resilience Engineering from the latest scientific achievements to recent practical applications. The First Resilience Engineering Symposium was held in Söderköping, Sweden, on October 25-29 2004. The Second Resilience Engineering Symposium was held in Juan-les-Pins, France, on November 8-10 2006, The Third Resilience Engineering Symposium was held in Juan-les-Pins, France, on October 28-30 2008. Since the first Symposium, resilience engineering has fast become recognised as a valuable complement to the established approaches to safety. Both industry and academia have recognised that resilience engineering offers valuable conceptual and practical basis that can be used to attack the problems of interconnectedness and intractability of complex socio-technical systems. The concepts and principles of resilience engineering have been tested and refined by applications in such fields as air traffic management, offshore production, patient safety, and commercial fishing. Continued work has also made it clear that resilience is neither limited to handling threats and disturbances, nor confined to situations where something can go wrong. Today, resilience is understood as the intrinsic ability of a system to adjust its functioning prior to, during, or following changes and disturbances, so that it can sustain required operations under both expected and unexpected conditions. This definition emphasizes the ability to continue functioning, rather than simply to react and recover from disturbances and the ability to deal with diverse conditions of functioning, expected as well as unexpected. For anyone who is interested in learning more about Resilience Engineering, the books published in the Ashgate Studies in Resilience Engineering provide an excellent starting point. Another sign that Resilience Engineering is coming of age is the establishment of the Resilience Engineering Association. The goal of this association is to provide a forum for coordination and exchange of experiences, by bringing together researchers and professionals working in the Resilience Engineering domain and organisations applying or willing to apply Resilience Engineering principles in their operations. The Resilience Engineering Association held its first General Assembly during the Fourth Symposium, and will in the future play an active role in the organisation of symposia and other activities related to Resilience Engineering