BAA-AFRL-RQKH-2015-0008-Atch5.pdf

Attachment 5

BAA-AFRL-RQKH-2015-0008

15 July 2015

STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES

(BASIC IDIQ)

Trust in Autonomy for Human-Machine Teaming

1.0 Background

This effort is soliciting innovative research concepts that advance the overall mission of the Human Trust and Interaction Branch (711 HPW/RHXS), Human Insight and Trust (HIT) Team, which is to conduct research to develop, test, evaluate and transition methods to foster human-robot teaming, methods to calibrate trust, and methods to foster transparency in human-machine contexts. This effort seeks to understand the human-machine trust process within: 1) pilots, 2) Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) operators and analysts, 3) maintenance domains, and 4) advanced human-robot teaming concepts. The Air Force has proposed human-machine teaming as a primary research thrust, yet to achieve this ambitious vision we need research on how to harness the socio-emotional elements of interpersonal team/trust dynamics and inject them into human-robot teams. These human-machine teaming dynamics can involve research studying the interplay of individual differences, machine characteristics, robot design, robot interaction patterns, human-machine interaction, and contextual facets of human-machine teaming. Research is needed to identify the factors that drive human-machine teaming effectiveness as defined by calibrated trust between the machine and human; effective team processes such as communication, coordination, and collaboration;

and shared awareness and shared intent between the humans and machine.

2.0 Scope

The contractor will provide basic, applied, and advanced technology development research, development and demonstration for understanding the trust calibration process. The domains of interest include semi-autonomous, symbiotic, human-machine teaming (HMT) research; research to identify the psychological and physiological antecedents and consequences of suspicion within a human-machine context; research to understand the factors that shape trust calibration within a human-machine context; and research to understand the most significant components driving trust and performance within human-robotic interaction. The domains of application for this research may include but is not limited to automated tools within cockpits;

analyst tools/aids for ISR analysis and exploitation; software code; interactive platforms such as automated translation capabilities; and advanced robotic systems within the Air Force. The present research may include both laboratory and field research. The contractor will collaborate and perform in-house research conducted at Wright-Patterson AFB; conduct field research at government facilities; and/or industrial settings; and/or conduct research at university settings.

“In-house” refers to the collaboration, teaming, and execution of research that will be done by the contractor at the government facility. The research proposed herein may align to one of the following core areas:

(1) Human-Robot Interaction – This effort seeks to study the process of human-robot interaction. Research under this core area will empirically identify methods, design features, or situational factors that promote effective team processes (i.e., trust, coordination, communication, shared situational awareness) between humans and robotic systems. These methods will be benchmarked against the ability to foster effective team processes and improved human-robot team performance.

(2) Trust Calibration – This effort seeks to empirically identify the antecedents of trust in a human-machine context. This effort will include an examination of the individual differences, situational factors, design features, and that influence under or over trust of machines, suspicion of machines or machine-generated data, and optimal trust of machines.

(3) Trust-Infused Design – This effort seeks to empirically demonstrate the costs and/or benefits of methods to improve the human-machine interaction through system design or instructional design (i.e., design principles or training tactics used to foster shared awareness and shared intent between human operators and their tools).

(4) Trust-based evaluation – This effort will examine operator trust and reliance on actual systems in the field through interactions with operators (e.g., pilots, analysts, software coders, engineers).

(5) Human Interaction with Robotic Surrogates – Studies of human interactions with robotic surrogates in security, foreign environment, and cyber domains.

(6) Mixed Initiative Decision making – this research will develop and evaluate technologies to support joint human-machine symbiosis of decision making processes in structured and or unstructured tasks.

3.0 Tasks and Technical Requirements/Objectives

The work under this effort will be implemented through an indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract- by specific task orders.

3.1 Technical Areas/Objectives

3.1.1 Human-Robot Interaction

This technical area involves performing experimental work to identify the most fruitful methods to foster team processes between humans and robots. Research may be conducted on elements of social robotics, social etiquette, human-robot dialogue, or robot design features intended to enable better communication, trust, coordination, and shared situation awareness between the human and the robot. Experiments may include simulated human-robot interactions or live interactions with a physical robot. Interactions between the human and the robot could be face-to-face or distributed. The robotic types may include humanoid robots or non-humanoid robots. Key elements of the research will involve empirically demonstrating the benefits of socio-emotional methods either via design, interaction, training, or other means as a facilitator of effective team processes between the human and the robotic system.

3.1.2 Trust Calibration

This technical area involves studies aiming to reveal the antecedents of trust within a human-machine trust context. The research should focus in on identifying the factors that shape the trust process (i.e., when human fail to trust a trustworthy system, when they trust an unworthy system, when they become suspicious of a system but neither trust nor distrust the system, and when they trust the system to an appropriate degree). Key research variables may include, but are not limited to: 1) individual difference variables such as attentional capacity, knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), personality, dispositional biases trending toward suspicion, trust or distrust, and trait emotion; 2) design features of the system; 3) situational factors such as high cognitive workload, state emotion, stress, fatigue; and 4) other contextual factors such as training biases, pedigree of information/source, socially-construed trust, third-party endorsements.

3.1.3 Trust-Infused Design

This technical area seeks to provide empirically-driven design principles for transparency methods validated through experimental methods. Transparency is the process for establishing shared awareness and shared intent between humans and machines. Transparency methods may include 1) highlighting the system’s social intent as it relates to the human operator, 2) providing dynamic or static contextual bounds signaling the system’s capabilities and or limitations, 3) providing the human operator insight into the analytical underpinnings of the system’s algorithms, decision rationale, performance assumptions, 4) provided the human and understanding of the system’s method for sensing/interacting with the environment, 5) providing the human operator insight into the system’s purpose, goals, and assumptions about teamwork, and 6) using human state factors (stress, emotion, performance limitations) to shape the performance, interaction strategy, and behavior of the system. A key aspect of this research will be experimental studies that manipulate aspects of transparency and evaluate the impact on human operator trust and overall human-machine performance.

3.1.4 Trust-Based Evaluation

This technical area will involve capturing, studying, and observing operator evaluations of fielded systems to garner: 1) an understanding of the level of trust and reliance evidenced by the operator, 2) an understanding of what factors shape operator trust on the system, and 3) an understanding of what factors can be shaped to alter these beliefs among operators.

3.1.5 Human Interaction with Robotic Surrogates

This technical area will involve research and development of autonomous systems designed to directly interaction with humans in a variety of situations. Example situations may include security checks, foreign interactions, cyber operations, or maintenance and manufacturing domains. The key science challenges could include: 1) understanding the implications of robot-mediated speech translation and subsequent interaction, 2) identifying the mechanisms for fostering effective robotic security checks, 3) understanding how to foster effective maintenance procedures with a mixed human-robot team, or 4) understanding the benefits of mixed human-robot teams within a manufacturing domain.

3.1.6 Mixed Initiative Decision making

This technical area will involve research on joint decision making between a human and a machine. Research topics may include but are not limited to shared decision making, human-machine transfer of authority, and human-machine teaming. Domains of interest could include interacting with autonomous vehicles, interactions with intelligent agent-based systems, and interacting with humanoid and non-humanoid robots.

3.2 Specific Technical Requirements (as determined by specific task orders)

3.2.1 Laboratory Research

The contractor shall perform laboratory research conducted at Wright-Patterson AFB in the Human Insight and Trust Laboratory, Human-Robot Teaming Laboratory, and government-affiliated laboratories associated with RHXS. This research shall require the contractor to perform at various levels within the research domain, to include research assistants and subject matter experts, to name a few. The contractor shall collaborate with government researchers to create and execute experimental designs, IRB preparations, data collections, data analyses, and technical writing for RHXS research. The contractor may provide hardware or software creation or acquisition as the research deems necessary.

3.2.2 Software Development

The contractor shall develop software (in the form of design prototypes, conceptual demonstrations, models, simulations, and or research platforms), as necessary, to accomplish specific research. This shall include, but not be limited to, software design, software development, source code documentation, and software user’s manuals.

3.2.3 Field Research

The contractor shall perform field research including cognitive tasks analysis, interviews, and survey research in the domain of human-machine trust. Field research may occur at Air Force bases, or other government or industry locations.

3.2.4 Demonstration

The contractor shall perform systems integration of software and hardware components as necessary to perform various technology demonstrations and evaluations.

3.2.5 Management of Effort

3.2.5.1 The contractor shall manage technical schedule and cost satisfaction of the task order;

plan, prepare, conduct and document reviews; track CDRL satisfaction; and interface with the customer to assess performance satisfaction and adjust the project as needed. Contractor shall comply with all applicable human use and animal use regulations.

3.2.5.2 Contract Holidays Clause Will Apply To This Effort As Follows

The prices/costs in Section B of the contract include holiday observances; accordingly, the Government will not be billed for such holidays, except when services are required by the Government and are actually performed on a holiday. The following days are contract holidays:

New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, Presidents Day, Memorial Day,4th of July, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day.

4.0 Security Requirements

This effort may generate classified work at SECRET level or higher. Please refer to the DD Form 254 for detailed security requirements.

4.1 Position of Trust

All contractor personnel require a minimum of a National Agency Check with written Inquires (NACI)/SF85 for any position that requires access to the internet, use of automated systems or unescorted entry into restricted or controlled areas prior to reporting for duty in performance of any task order. The investigation is not for a security clearance; it is for a position of trust. This is a mandatory requirement set forth in DoD 5200.2-R, Personnel Security Program and AFI 31-501, Personnel Security Program Management. All documentation required for security certification shall be the responsibility of the contractor. No foreign nationals shall be employed for any task order issued under this contract without prior approval of the Government.

4.2 Operations Security (OPSEC)

The contractor shall provide OPSEC protection for all sensitive/critical information as defined by AFI 10-701 (Operations Security), the 711 HPW OPSEC Plan, and critical information list. The contractor shall participate in the 711 HPW sustained OPSEC awareness training or include OPSEC training as part of their on-going security program. The 711 HPW OPSEC coordinator will evaluate the OPSEC posture of AF contract activities and operations.

4.3 Information Security and Force Protection

The contractor shall provide Information Security and Force Protection training as defined by AFI 16-1404, Air Force Information Security Program and AFI 10-245 (Air Force Antiterrorism Standards). The contractor shall participate in the 711 HPW sustained information Security and Force Protection/Antiterrorism training or include this training as part of their on-going security program. The 711HPW Security Managers will evaluate the training posture of AF contract activities and operations. This requirement is set forth in AFI 16-1404, AFI 10-245 and applicable AFMC and local supplements.

5.0 CDRLs:

CDRL # CDRL NAME FREQUENCY

A001 Scientific and Technical Reports – Final Report ONE/R A002 Funds and Man-Hour Expenditure Report MTHLY A003 Contract Funds Status Report (CFSR) QRTLY A004 Status Report MTHLY A005 Presentation Material ASREQ A006 Computer Software Product–Source Code 1TIME A007 Software Test Plan (STP) ASREQ A008 Software Product Specification (SPS) ASREQ A009 Software User Manual (SUM) ASREQ A010 Software Version Description (SVD) ASREQ A011 System/Subsystem Design Description (SSDD) ASREQ A012 System/Subsystem Specification (SSS) ASREQ A013 Software Requirements Specification (SRS) ASREQ A014 Software Design Description (SDD) ASREQ