航天飞行系统验证中的认知偏差

Steven. A. Larson, Steven. A. Larson
{"title":"航天飞行系统验证中的认知偏差","authors":"Steven. A. Larson, Steven. A. Larson","doi":"10.1109/AERO.2012.6187404","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cognitive bias is generally recognized as playing a significant role in virtually all domains of human decision making. Insight in to this role is informally built in to many of the system engineering practices employed in the aero space industry. The review process, for example, typically has features that help to counteract the effect of bias. This paper presents a discussion of how commonly recognized biases may affect the verification and validation process. Verifying and validating a system is arguably more challenging than development, both technically and cognitively. Whereas there may be a relatively limited number of options available for the design of a particular aspect of a system, there is a virtually unlimited number of potential verification scenarios that may be explored. The probability of any particular scenario occurring in operations is typically very difficult to estimate, which increases reliance on judgment that may be affected by bias. Implementing a verification activity often presents technical challenges that, if they can be overcome at all, often result in a departure from actual flight conditions (e.g., 1-g testing, simulation, time compression, artificial fault injection) that may raise additional questions about the meaningfulness of the results, and create opportunities for the introduction of additional biases. In addition to mitigating the biases it can introduce directly, the verification and validation process must also overcome the cumulative effect of biases introduced during all previous stages of development. A variety of cognitive biases will be described, with research results for illustration. A handful of case studies will be presented that show how cognitive bias may have affected the verification and validation process on recent JPL flight projects, identify areas of strength and weakness, and identify potential changes or additions to commonly used techniques that could provide a more robust verification and validation of future systems.","PeriodicalId":6421,"journal":{"name":"2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference","volume":"14 1","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive bias in the verification and validation of space flight systems\",\"authors\":\"Steven. A. Larson, Steven. A. Larson\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/AERO.2012.6187404\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Cognitive bias is generally recognized as playing a significant role in virtually all domains of human decision making. Insight in to this role is informally built in to many of the system engineering practices employed in the aero space industry. The review process, for example, typically has features that help to counteract the effect of bias. This paper presents a discussion of how commonly recognized biases may affect the verification and validation process. Verifying and validating a system is arguably more challenging than development, both technically and cognitively. Whereas there may be a relatively limited number of options available for the design of a particular aspect of a system, there is a virtually unlimited number of potential verification scenarios that may be explored. The probability of any particular scenario occurring in operations is typically very difficult to estimate, which increases reliance on judgment that may be affected by bias. Implementing a verification activity often presents technical challenges that, if they can be overcome at all, often result in a departure from actual flight conditions (e.g., 1-g testing, simulation, time compression, artificial fault injection) that may raise additional questions about the meaningfulness of the results, and create opportunities for the introduction of additional biases. In addition to mitigating the biases it can introduce directly, the verification and validation process must also overcome the cumulative effect of biases introduced during all previous stages of development. A variety of cognitive biases will be described, with research results for illustration. A handful of case studies will be presented that show how cognitive bias may have affected the verification and validation process on recent JPL flight projects, identify areas of strength and weakness, and identify potential changes or additions to commonly used techniques that could provide a more robust verification and validation of future systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":6421,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"1-10\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2012.6187404\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2012 IEEE Aerospace Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2012.6187404","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

人们普遍认为,认知偏见在人类决策的几乎所有领域都发挥着重要作用。对这个角色的洞察是在航空航天工业中采用的许多系统工程实践中非正式地建立起来的。例如,审查过程通常具有有助于抵消偏见影响的特征。本文介绍了如何普遍认识的偏见可能会影响验证和确认过程的讨论。无论在技术上还是在认知上,验证和确认系统都可以说比开发更具挑战性。尽管对于系统的某个特定方面的设计,可用的选项可能相对有限,但实际上可以探索的潜在验证场景数量是无限的。在操作中发生任何特定情况的可能性通常很难估计,这增加了对可能受偏见影响的判断的依赖。实现验证活动通常会提出技术挑战,如果能够克服这些挑战,通常会导致偏离实际飞行条件(例如,1-g测试、模拟、时间压缩、人工故障注入),这可能会对结果的意义提出额外的问题,并为引入额外的偏差创造机会。除了减轻它可以直接引入的偏差之外,验证和确认过程还必须克服在所有先前开发阶段引入的偏差的累积效应。各种认知偏差将被描述,并以研究结果为例。将展示一些案例研究,展示认知偏差如何影响最近JPL飞行项目的验证和验证过程,确定优势和劣势领域,并确定对常用技术的潜在更改或补充,这些技术可以为未来系统提供更强大的验证和验证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cognitive bias in the verification and validation of space flight systems
Cognitive bias is generally recognized as playing a significant role in virtually all domains of human decision making. Insight in to this role is informally built in to many of the system engineering practices employed in the aero space industry. The review process, for example, typically has features that help to counteract the effect of bias. This paper presents a discussion of how commonly recognized biases may affect the verification and validation process. Verifying and validating a system is arguably more challenging than development, both technically and cognitively. Whereas there may be a relatively limited number of options available for the design of a particular aspect of a system, there is a virtually unlimited number of potential verification scenarios that may be explored. The probability of any particular scenario occurring in operations is typically very difficult to estimate, which increases reliance on judgment that may be affected by bias. Implementing a verification activity often presents technical challenges that, if they can be overcome at all, often result in a departure from actual flight conditions (e.g., 1-g testing, simulation, time compression, artificial fault injection) that may raise additional questions about the meaningfulness of the results, and create opportunities for the introduction of additional biases. In addition to mitigating the biases it can introduce directly, the verification and validation process must also overcome the cumulative effect of biases introduced during all previous stages of development. A variety of cognitive biases will be described, with research results for illustration. A handful of case studies will be presented that show how cognitive bias may have affected the verification and validation process on recent JPL flight projects, identify areas of strength and weakness, and identify potential changes or additions to commonly used techniques that could provide a more robust verification and validation of future systems.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信