Co7: Converging trends in complex software-intensive control

W e live in an increasingly technological world. Automated systems certainly can make life easier, but they can also create complexity and uncertainty. Moreover, it is clear that automation does not merely supplant human activity, but also transforms the nature of human work. This review examines an original account of this transformation-a link between automation technology and the sense that our actions cause effects on the outside world (so-called 'agency'). Accordingly, we first discuss the human factor issues related to automation technology. Particularly, we introduce the out-of-the-loop performance problem. Then, we introduce recent findings about agency. We propose that several recently developed psychological approaches to the self-promise to enhance our comprehension of the transformation induced by increased automation. Next, we address the controversial issue of agency measuring, particularly the necessary dissociation between explicit and implicit agency measurement. In particular, we introduce the intentional binding effect as an implicit agency measurement, and we discuss the problems and issues related to the generalization of this effect to more complex situations. Finally, we suggest that the investigation of this authorship processing in the field of human-machine interaction may be fruitful, both to elaborate concrete design recommendations and to evaluate the potentiality for an HMI to satisfy the agency mechanism. Automation and human control in complex systems "The burning question of the near future will not be how much work a man can do safely, but how little." [85] There is perhaps no facet of modern society in which the influence of automation technology has not been felt. Whether at work or at home, while travelling or while engaged in leisurely pursuits, human beings are becoming increasingly accustomed to using and interacting with sophisticated computer systems designed to assist them in their activities. Even more radical changes are anticipated in the future, as computers increase in power, speed and "intelligence". We have usually focused on the perceived benefits of new automated or computerized devices. This is perhaps not surprising, given the sophistication and ingenuity of design of many such systems (e.g., the automatic landing of a jumbo jet, or the docking of two spacecraft). The economic benefits that automation can provide, or is perceived to offer, also tend to focus public attention on the technical capabilities of automation. However, our fascination with the possibilities afforded by technology often obscures the fact that new computerized and automated devices also create new burdens and complexities for the individuals and teams of practitioners responsible for operating, troubleshooting and managing high-consequence systems. Whatever the merits of any particular automation technology, it is clear that automation does not merely supplant human activity but also transforms the nature of human work. As a matter of fact, the role of the human actors may possibly evolve from direct control to supervision. Understanding the characteristics of this transformation is vital for successful design of new automated systems. Automation and OOL performance problem When new automation is introduced into a system, or when there is an increase in the autonomy of automated systems, developers often assume that adding "automation" is a simple substitution of a machine activity for human activity (substitution myth, see [92]). Empirical data on the relationship of people and technology suggest that this is not the case and that traditional automation has many negative performance and safety consequences associated with it stemming from the human out-of-the-loop (OOL) performance problem (see [22], [50]). Classically, the out-of-the-loop performance problem leaves operators of automated systems handicapped in their ability to take over manual operations in the event of automation failure [22]. The OOL performance problem has been attributed to a number of underlying factors, including human vigilance decrements (see [7], [86]), Issue 4-May 2012-Sense of Control in Supervision Tasks of Automated Systems

2004

We anticipate the next wave in the information technology revolution to be the convergence of control, i.e., sensing and actuation, with communication and computing. We address the broad set of issues that we believe to be important to the design, implementation, and proliferation of such systems. In particular, we expound on the topics of the architecture of such systems, methodologies for design, distributed time, services, and middleware. We describe our efforts in the Convergence Lab at the University of Illinois with respect to each of these topics.

Systems intended to operate in dynamic, complex environments – without intervention from their designers or significant amounts of domain-dependent information provided at design time – must be equipped with a sufficient level of existential autonomy. This feature of naturally intelligent systems has largely been missing from cognitive architectures created to date, due in part to the fact that high levels of existential autonomy require systems to program themselves; good principles for self-programming have remained elusive. Achieving this with the major programming methodologies in use today is not likely, as these are without exception designed to be used by the human mind: Producing self-programming systems that can grow from first principles using these therefore requires first solving the AI problem itself – the very problem we are trying to solve. Advances in existential autonomy call for a new programming paradigm, with self-programming squarely at its center. The principles of such a paradigm are likely to be fundamentally different from prevailing approaches; among the desired features for a programming language designed for automatic self-programming are (a) support for autonomous knowledge acquisition, (b) real-time and any-time operation, (c) reflectivity, and (d) massive parallelization. With these and other requirements guiding our work, we have created a programming paradigm and language called Replicode. Here we discuss the reasoning behind our approach and the main motivations and features that set this work from apart from prior approaches.

IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control

The Eighteenth Century: Theory and Interpretation, 2008

tomatic machines, he based it upon an analogy of steering ships or machine governors:

IEEE Control Systems, 2003

Proceedings of the European Control Conference, 2001

Definitions of some key concepts (model, intelligence, learning, control) are proposed as a contribution to unify the different paradigms and cultures actually existent in systems and control. These definitions are made in the information space, an extension of the state space with the additional dimension of information granularity. The aim is to create a common language and a common framework where all cultures of control can meet and work together for the progress of the science and technology in order to maintain Control as a leading discipline.

2002

The field of Control provides the principles and methods used to design physical and information systems that maintain desirable performance by automatically adapting to changes in the environment. Over the last forty years, the field has seen huge advances, leveraging technology improvements in sensing and computation with breakthroughs in the underlying principles and mathematics. Automatic feedback control systems now play critical roles in many fields, including manufacturing, electronics, communications, transportation, computers and networks, and many military systems. As we begin the 21st Century, the opportunities for Control principles and methods are exploding. Increasingly, computation, communication and sensing will be cheap and ubiquitous, with more and more devices including embedded, high-performance processors, sensors, and networking hardware. This will make possible the development of machines with a degree of intelligence and reactivity that will change everyone’s...

How can we coexist with scientific and technical progress? We have completed our analysis of the history of development and of the current state of technologies as well as made some assumptions about the directions of their further development. But, of course, life will turn more diverse than any forecasts and even imaginations, and it is difficult to define what will become reality and what will not. But nevertheless, we have no doubts that the development will head for creation of self-regulating systems. We think there is coming a heyday of the systems which will work mostly independently and at the same time more insistently controlling the most diverse aspects of human life. All this claims for a deep understanding and some activity in order to minimize the emerging problems; for example, to prevent the emergence of a new and even more supervising ‘Big Brother’ knowing much more about us than the ‘Brother’ that visibly controls all our life on the Internet today. Not only our on-line chat, but also the genealogic tree, medical history, individual peculiarities of the organism and probably, even our thoughts will become accessible soon. Who, how and for what for purpose will use this information, can hardly be ignored.

Applied Sciences, 2021

A wide range of ongoing research in the areas of controller design and information engineering reveals that the pace of technological change in this domain seems to be accelerating [...]