CHAPTER 52 HUMAN FACTORS AND ERGONOMICS IN DESIGN OF A 3 : AUTOMATION, AUTONOMY, AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
W. Karwowski,Dave B. Miller,Matthew Canham,B. Sawyer
Abstract:Automation, autonomy, and artificial intelligence (AI) are technologies which serve as extensions of human ability, contributing self-produced, non-human effort (see Figure 1). These three terms encompass a set of computational tools that can learn from data, systems that act in a reasonable, and even human-like manner (Bolton, Machová, Kovacova, & Valaskova, 2018; Dash, McMurtrey, Rebman, & Kar, 2019; Shekhar, 2019). Computing of this nature has been pursued at least since the 1950s, when Simon predicted machines “capable ... of doing any work a man can do” (Chase & Simon, 1973), and today such envisioned technology appears under the moniker Artificial General Intelligence (AGI). The desire for synthetic intelligent creations has been a staple of human desire for much longer, in various forms (Hancock et al., 2011; Schaefer et al., 2015). While AGI remains, at present, just a dream. A number of promising, and promised, future technologies under development require machines to learn, understand, and adapt to novel situations with at least the flexibility humans exhibit, albeit in a more limited context. The major technology underlying AI, machine learning (ML), is useful for engineering such autonomy, as it can learn from external data input, either with direct human oversight or without. In developing these highly useful technologies, knowledge from human factors and ergonomics (HF/E) can be of great use, especially to designers charged with the difficult task of dovetailing humans and machines in complex systems built to navigate sometimes chaotic environments. Technology serves as a greater extension of human ability each year, and optimal performance still results from hybrid human–machine teams (Figure 1). Automation, autonomy, and AI are all distinguished by self-direction, and indeed it is arguable that these terms are synonymous in intent. As such, in the present chapter we will refer to them collectively under the moniker A3 (pronounced “A cubed” /A kyübd). Herbert Simon (1965) named the technology of automation in his writing, which retains its ancient meaning “acting of itself” or “to rule one’s self.” The Latin roots of the word “autonomy” likewise relate to “making one’s own laws,” and so in this chapter we will use that term to indicate the degree to which a system or machine is under its own control. Automation, meanwhile, will be used to refer to the degree of replacing human work in a given domain or task (Figure 2). Using these terms, we can say that A3 technologies, with varying levels of autonomy, automate tasks once exclusively performed by humans. These terms have been used quite interchangeably in the literature, patents, manuals, and other technical, scientific, and public discourse. Bradshaw, Hoffman, Johnson, and Woods (2013) explore these overlaps in terminology and surrounding misconceptions, by enumerating seven “deadly myths.” These are: (1) The erroneous idea that autonomy is unidimensional, when in fact the term encompasses qualities such as self-directedness, self-sufficiency, and many more; (2) Numeric scales describing “levels of autonomy” are poor ways to scientifically ground these multiple concepts; (3) Autonomy is not a “widget,” a specific technology, or a discrete property of the system; (4) A3 systems as a rule are not truly autonomous, requiring human involvement on some timescale; (5) Full autonomy, when eventually achieved, does not obviate the need for human–machine collaboration; (6) Humans create systems incapable of collaborating with us at our own peril;
Computer Science,Engineering