Working in a Heartbeat: Considerations for AI Teammates in Search and Rescue Teams

Abstract

As artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics have become more capable as technologies, human-AI teams (HATs) have sought to model how humans can interdependently work with AI to accomplish a shared goal. Specifically, HATs seek to leverage autonomy in both digital and physical AI agents to improve the teamwork and outcomes of these teams. In search-and-rescue (SAR) teams, where situations are dynamic and the environments are hazardous, HATs require complex considerations for interdependent work with AI. This qualitative interview study explores insights from 17 SAR professionals to investigate teamwork considerations that can benefit the formation of search-and-rescue human-AI teams (SAR-HATs). Participants’ concerns about time and affective needs suggest that SAR-HATs would benefit significantly from the explicit delineation of search and rescue tasks. HATs can expedite search tasks without forgoing safety by delegating roles that afford parallel completion of information acquisitions, search routines, and safety precautions. Additionally, search tasks can afflict human teammates with psychological trauma, but AI teammates benefit from their insusceptibility to trauma-related stressors. However, in rescue tasks, these capabilities have inverse benefits, wherein humans benefit from their capacity to feel emotion when interacting with the patients, and AI may struggle.

Keywords

artificial intelligence human-AI teaming search and rescue

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adams

J. A.

Humphrey

C. M.

Goodrich

M. A.

Cooper

J. L.

Morse

B. S.

Engh

Rasmussen

(2009). Cognitive task analysis for developing unmanned aerial vehicle wilderness search support. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 3(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1518/155534309X431926

Berger

Coutinho

E. S. F.

Figueira

Marques-Portella

Luz

M. P.

Neylan

T. C.

Marmar

C. R.

Mendlowicz

M. V.

(2012). Rescuers at risk: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis of the worldwide current prevalence and correlates of PTSD in rescue workers. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 47(6), 1001–1011. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-011-0408-2

Berretta

Tausch

Ontrup

Gilles

Peifer

Kluge

(2023). Defining human-AI teaming the human-centered way: A scoping review and network analysis. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 6, 34–61. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2023.1250725

Bousetouane

(2025). Physical AI agents: integrating cognitive intelligence with real-world action (No. arXiv:2501.08944). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2501.08944

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun

Clarke

(2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806

Cangan

B. G.

(2019). Risk-aware human-in-the-loop multi-robot path planning for lost person search and rescue. Virginia Tech.

Chitikena

Sanfilippo

(2023). Robotics in search and rescue (SAR) operations: An ethical and design perspective framework for response phase. Applied Sciences, 13(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13031800

Cummings

M. M.

(2014). Man versus machine or man + machine? IEEE Intelligent Systems, 29(5), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2014.87

10.

Dellermann

Calma

Lipusch

Weber

Weigel

Ebel

(2021). The future of human-AI collaboration: A taxonomy of design knowledge for hybrid intelligence systems (No. arXiv:2105.03354). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.03354

11.

Demir

Likens

A. D.

Cooke

N. J.

Amazeen

P. G.

McNeese

N. J.

(2019). Team coordination and effectiveness in human-autonomy teaming. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 49(2), 150–159. https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2018.2877482

12.

Drew

D. S.

(2021). Multi-agent systems for search and rescue applications. Current Robotics Reports, 2(2), 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43154-021-00048-3

13.

Fahy

Evarts

Stein

(2022, September 1). U.S. fire department profile | NFPA Research. NFPA Research. https://www.nfpa.org/education-and-research/research/nfpa-research/fire-statistical-reports/us-fire-department-profile

14.

Flathmann

Schelble

B. G.

Zhang

McNeese

N. J.

(2021). Modeling and guiding the creation of ethical human-AI teams. In Proceedings of the 2021 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (pp. 469–479). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3461702.3462573

15.

Franklin

(1997). Autonomous agents as embodied AI. Cybernetics and Systems, 28(6), 499–520. https://doi.org/10.1080/019697297126029

16.

Jarrahi

M. H.

(2018). Artificial intelligence and the future of work: Human-AI symbiosis in organizational decision making. Business Horizons, 61(4), 577–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.03.007

17.

McNeese

N. J.

Demir

Cooke

N. J.

Myers

(2018). Teaming with a synthetic teammate: Insights into human-autonomy teaming. Human Factors, 60(2), 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720817743223

18.

Milani

Roveri

Falla

Dal Cappello

Strapazzon

(2023). Occupational accidents among search and rescue providers during mountain rescue operations and training events. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 81(6), 699–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2022.12.015

19.

Nasar

Da Silva Torres

Gundersen

O. E.

Karlsen

A. T.

(2023). The use of decision support in search and rescue: A systematic literature review. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 12(5), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi12050182

20.

O’Neill

McNeese

Barron

Schelble

(2022). Human–autonomy teaming: A review and analysis of the empirical literature. Human Factors, 64(5), 904–938. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720820960865

21.

Rocha

R. P.

Portugal

Couceiro

Araújo

Menezes

Lobo

(2013). The CHOPIN project: Cooperation between human and robotic teams in catastrophic incidents. In 2013 IEEE international symposium on safety, security, and rescue robotics (SSRR) (pp. 1–4). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SSRR.2013.6719322

22.

Schelble

B. G.

Flathmann

McNeese

(2020). Towards meaningfully integrating human-autonomy teaming in applied settings. In Proceedings of the 8th international conference on human-agent interaction (pp. 149–156). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3406499.3415077

23.

Wang

Maes

Ren

Shneiderman

Shi

Wang

(2021). Designing AI to work WITH or FOR people? In Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–5). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3450394

24.

Wilkens

Langholf

Ontrup

, Department of Work and Organizational Psychology Faculty of Psychology Ruhr-Universität Bochum, & Kluge

(2021). Towards a maturity model of human-centered AI – A reference for AI implementation at the workplace. In Competence development and learning assistance systems for the data-driven future (pp. 179–198). Goto Verlag. https://doi.org/10.30844/wgab_2021_11

25.

Williams

. (2020). Collaborative multi-robot multi-human teams in search and rescue. Proceedings of the 17th International ISCRAM Conference. Blacksburg, VA, USA. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10196376

26.

Yarwood

(2010). Risk, rescue and emergency services: The changing spatialities of Mountain Rescue Teams in England and Wales. Geoforum, 41(2), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2009.10.004