臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

當控制系統變的越來越複雜的同時，自動控制的比例也隨之增加。人的角色也已經從原本的系統操作員轉變為系統監測員。所以，人機互動的安全設計也相對變的困難。如何避免操作員心理模式和系統工作模式的不對稱所產生的模式混淆(mode confusion)，在擁有人機介面的系統中是一項很關鍵的議題。
在論文當中，我們在系統設計階段發展一種視覺化模式用來模擬人機互動，我們使用的視覺化模式(statechart)，並透過UML Activity Diagram和rule-based table來分析和比較操作員內心模式和系統工作模式的不同。透過比對，我們就可以檢測出潛在的模式混淆(mode confusion) 。
除此之外，在系統執行階段我們可以加入模式混淆偵測模組(mode confusion detection module)來收集操作員的操作命令。 這個模組被用來預測操作員目前的工作模式並比對目前系統的工作模式。
在過去，執行階段的模式混淆很難偵測的出來。因此提出較安全的人機互動方式來達到偵測模式混淆的目的。

As control systems become more and more complex, the use of automated control has increased at the same time. The rule of human operator has changed from primary system controller to a supervisor or a monitor. So, safe design of human-computer interaction becomes more difficult. How to prevent human-computer systems from mode-confusion, caused by a mismatch between the operator’s mental mode and the system’s working mode is a critical issue.
In this thesis, we developed a visual model to be used to simulate human-computer interaction in the design phase. We used the visual model (statechart) , UML Activity Diagram and rule based tables, to analyze and compare the differences between the operator’s mental mode and the system’s operator mode. Through the comparison, we may detect potential mode confusion.
Besides, at run-time we can add the mode confusion detection module to collect operator’s commands. The module is used to predict the operator’s current working mode and, then to compare it with current system working mode.
In the past, mode confusion of runtime phase is difficult to detect .This thesis provides a sequence of steps to solve this run-time detection problem. Therefore, safer human-computer interaction can be achieved.

第一章 序論
第二章 相關研究背景
2.1 Statechart
2.2 Activity diagram
2.3 Mode confusion
第三章 研究方法
3.1導論
3.2 複合式系統(Hybrid System)模型概念
3.3 設計階段模式混淆的偵測 (detection)
3.3.1 Statechart之建構及分析
3.3.2 系統行為的分析方法
3.3.3 執行階段模式混淆的偵測
3.4 執行階段模式混淆的偵測
3.5 結論
第四章 個案研究
4.1 案例: 蒸氣鍋爐系統
4.1.1 系統描述
4.1.2 用Statechart建系統模型
4.1.3 規則為基礎的條列分析法 (Rule-base Analysis )
4.1.4 利用Activity Diagram 來分析系統行為
4.2 執行階段模式混淆的偵測
4.3 鍋爐案例的實作模擬
第五章 結論

Reference
[1] R.W. Butler,S.P. Miller,J. N. Potts,V.A. Carreno, “A Formal Methods Approach to the Analysis of Mode Confusion,” IEEE pp C41-1-C41-8,1998.
[2] Nancy G.Leveson et al. “Analyzing Software Specifications for Mode Confusion Potential,” Proceedings of the Workshop on Human Error and System Development, Glascow, March 1997.
[3] Nancy G.Leveson, Everett Palmer,“Designing Automation to Reduce Operator Errors,” IEEE, pp 1144-1150,1997.
[4] Chris J Garrett , “The Dynamic Flowgraph Methodology for Assessing the Dependability of Embeded Software System,” IEEE transactions on System. Man and Cybernetics 5, May 1995
[5] Lars Kuhne , Michael Siegel “Development of a Steamboiler Control using Statemate,” University of Kiel Chair of software technology.
[6] A.Bye et al., “Analysing Automation Degree and Information Exchange in Joint Cognitive Systems: FAME, an Analytical Approach,”IEEE,pp Ⅲ-699-Ⅲ704,1999.
[7] John Rushby, Judith Crow,Everett Palmer, “An Automated Method to Detect Potential Mode Confusions,” IEEE,pp 4.B.2-1-4.B.2-6,1999.
[8] Fan C, Yih S. “Frame-based safety analysis approach for decision-base errors,” Reliability Engineering and System Safety 55,243-256,1997.
[9] Mattew S.Jaffe, Nancy G.Leveson,“Completeness, Robustness, and Safety in Real-Time Software Requirements Specification,” ACM,pp 302-311,1989.
[10] T.J. Shimeall, N.G. Leveson, “An Empirical Comparison of Software Fault Tolerance and Elimination,” IEEE Transactions on software engineering,Vol 17, No2, pp 173-187,1991.
[11] N.G.Leveson,M. Heimdahl, H. Hildreth,J.Reese, R. Ortega, “Experiences using statecharts for a system requirements,” IEEE, pp 31-41,1991.
[12] A.Bye et al., “Analysing Automation Degree and Information Exchange in Joint Cognitive Systems: FAME, an Analytical Approach,”IEEE,pp Ⅲ-699-Ⅲ704,1999.
[13] Y. Bowler,L. Cullen,E. Hutchinson,“Enhancing the safety of future systems,”An Internation Conference on Human Interfaces in Control Rooms,Cockpits and Command Centres, pp 179-183, 1999.
[14] A.R. Pritchett,S. Lee,D. Huang,D. Goldsman,“Hybrid-System Simulation for Nation Airspace System Safety Analysis,”Proceedings of the 2000 Winter Simulation Conference, pp 1132-1142,2000.
[15] El Miloud.El Koursi,C.Y. Chan,W.B. Zhang,“Preliminary Safety Analysis of Frontal Collision Avoidance Systems,” 2000 IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Conference Proceedings, pp 410-415,2000.
[16] P.G. Wijayar.,M. Maekawa,“Extending Fault Trees with an AND-THEN Gate,” IEEE,pp 283-292,2000.
[17] Nancy G.Leveson, “Safeware: System Safety and Computer,” Addison-Wesley Publ. Company,1995.ISBM 0-201-11972-2.
[18] N.D. Sarter,D.D. Woods, “How in the world did I ever get into that mode?,” Mode error and awareness in supervisor control, Human Factory,37(1),pp 5-19,1995.