Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Effective decision support must operate within the proper context view, satisfying potentially complex task demands and fluctuating user capabilities, in support of an overall mission. In response to this need, we are developing an integrated system called Info-Cognitive Proactive Decision Support (InfoCog). InfoCog combines two different perspectives essential for proactive decision support: a data-centered representation of the mission information space and a user-centered representation of the human decision space. InfoCog overcomes the limitations and drawbacks of today’s decision support systems that adopt only the information or human decision spaces. We present here a method to characterize the mission information space using a hierarchical probabilistic model combined with multiple hypothesis management. For user characterization, we have developed a user-centric task and cognitive evaluation model. We then combine these complementary perspectives of the current context with predictive capabilities from the mission and user models to anticipate and proactively support future information needs.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bishop

(2006). Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, Springer-Verlag, New York, 380-396

Bui

Venkatesh

West

(2002) Policy Recognition in the Abstract Hidden Markov Model, J. of Artificial Intelligence Research, 17, 451.

Brézillon

(1999). Context in problem solving: A survey. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 14(1), 1-34.

Cappelli

Sherer

P. D.

(1991). The missing role of context in OB: The need for a meso-level approach. Research in Organizational Behavior, 13, 55–110.

Clancey

W. J.

Sachs

Sierhuis

van Hoof

(1998). Brahms: Simulating practice for work systems design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 49, 831-865.

Dey

A.K.

Abowd

G.D.

Towards a Better Understanding of Context and Context-Awareness (2000). ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Workshop on the What, Who, Where, When, and How of Context-Awareness.

Doucet

de Freitas

Murphy

Russell

(2000). “Rao-Blackwellised Particle Filtering for Dynamic Bayesian Networks”, UAI '00, 176-183.

Durkee

Pappada

Ortiz

Feeney

Galster

(2015). Using Context to Optimize a Functional State Estimation Engine in Unmanned Aircraft System Operations. Foundations of Augmented Cognition, HCIIConference.

Endsley

M.R.

(1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors 37, 32–64.

10.

Fikes

R.E.

Nilsson

N.J.

(1971). STRIPS: A New Approach to the Application of Theorem Proving to Problem Solving. Artificial Intelligence, 2, 189-208.

11.

Ganberg

Ayers

Schurr

Therrien

Rousseau

(2011). Representing context using the context for human and automation teams model. Presentation at the 25th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

12.

John

Kieras

D.E.

(1996). Using GOMS for user interface design and evaluation: Which technique? ACM Trans. on Computer-Human Interaction, 3, 4, 287-319.

13.

Johns

(2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behaviour. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386–408.

14.

Mowday

R. T.

Sutton

R. I.

(1993). Organizational behavior: Linking individuals and groups to organizational contexts. Annual Review of Psychology, 44, 195–229.

15.

Paternò

Mancini

Meniconi

(1997). ConcurTaskTrees: A Diagrammatic Notation for Specifying Task Models. HCI Interact ’97. Howard Hammond Lindgaard (Ed.). Chapman Hill, 362-369.

16.

Pfautz

S.L.

Ganberg

Picciano

Schurr

(2015). Leveraging Context to Improve Human-System Performance. AI Magazine (in press).

17.

Pioch

, et al. (2003). CADRE: Continuous analysis and discovery from relational evidence. International Conference on Integration of Knowledge Intensive Multi-Agent Systems [KIMAS], 555-561.

Characterizing Mission and User Context for Proactive Decision Support

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References