Skip to Content
Last modified by Tjalling Haije on 2026/07/27 16:18
From version 1.3
edited by Tjalling Haije
on 2026/07/27 10:35
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 2.2
edited by Tjalling Haije
on 2026/07/27 10:41
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -i. TDPs evaluation SFT1
1 +i. Design Patterns Evaluation SFT1
Content
... ... @@ -1,9 +1,13 @@
1 -Design patterns of interest:
1 +== Approach ==
2 2  
3 +The goal for the human-machine teaming framework is to (among others) develop human-machine teaming patterns that can be used to use technology
4 +
5 +**Design patterns of interest: **
6 +
3 3  * [[TDP2 — Robots First, Then Humans Protocol>>2\. Specification.Requirements.TDP2 — Robots First, Then Humans Protocol.WebHome]]
4 4  * [[IDP1 — Role-Based, Context-Specific Information Distribution>>2\. Specification.Requirements.IDP1 — Role-Based, Context-Specific Information Distribution.WebHome]]
5 5  
6 -Approaches for evaluating DPs:
10 +**Approaches for evaluating DPs:**
7 7  
8 8  1. Make new usecases based on how the FR actually did the TDP and IDP with the robots with claims and check those with the raw data.
9 9  1. Match the premade usecase [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]] with the incident that fits best, and evaluate the claims for the TDP and IDP of interest using results from that incident.
... ... @@ -15,12 +15,22 @@
15 15  
16 16  Approach:
17 17  
18 -* Figure out which incidents TDP2 and IDP1 were used
19 -* Check if the tech worked as required (or good enough to be of value) in those incidents
20 -* Figure out which of those incidents correspond most with [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]]
21 -* Try to fill in [[j. SFT1 evaluation templates >>3\. Evaluation.SFT1.g\. Prototype .WebHome]]from the raw results, which
22 -* Check for each of the claims the results for the connected measures > Evaluates UC
23 -* Check for each of the pros/cons for the Design Pattern if they are validated > Evaluates Design Pattern
24 -* Adjust the Design Patterns based on the results and/or their expected pros/cons.
25 -* Update how the users should use the technology and/or the technology itself to achieve the objectives.
26 -* Note missing data that should be included in the evaluation next time.
22 +1. Figure out in which incidents TDP2 and IDP1 were used
23 +1. Check if the tech worked as required (or good enough to be of value) in those incidents
24 +1. Figure out which of those incidents correspond most with [[UC04.3: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYMAL (USAR).WebHome]]
25 +1. Try to fill in [[j. SFT1 evaluation templates >>3\. Evaluation.SFT1.g\. Prototype .WebHome]]from the raw results, which
26 +1. Check for each of the claims the results for the connected measures > Evaluates UC
27 +1. Check for each of the pros/cons for the Design Pattern if they are validated > Evaluates Design Pattern
28 +1. Adjust the Design Patterns based on the results and/or their expected pros/cons.
29 +1. Update how the users should use the technology and/or the technology itself to achieve the objectives.
30 +1. Note missing data that should be included in the evaluation next time.
31 +
32 +== Design Patterns per Incident ==
33 +
34 +|**Incident**|**Design Pattern**
35 +| |
36 +| |
37 +| |
38 +| |
39 +
40 +