Skip to Content
Last modified by Tjalling Haije on 2026/07/27 16:18
From version 3.1
edited by Tjalling Haije
on 2026/07/27 13:37
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 2.16
edited by Tjalling Haije
on 2026/07/27 13:16
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Title
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -k. Design Patterns Evaluation SFT1
1 +i. Design Patterns Evaluation SFT1
Content
... ... @@ -90,14 +90,13 @@
90 90  |(% style="width:166px" %)Run 1, USAR team 1|(% style="width:442px" %)(((
91 91  The outdoor drone provides the Team Leader with an initial assessment of the incident scene. The Team Leader uses this information to deploy USAR teams and robotic assets; ANYmal supports by investigating and clearing hazards, after which the USAR teams gain access, stabilize the structure, locate victims, and perform rescues while continuously reporting progress to the Team Leader.
92 92  )))|(% style="width:238px" %)[[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]] 
93 -Although the robot didn't explore inside.
93 +Although the robot seems to have had a very limited role here and not have explored much.
94 94  |(% style="width:166px" %)Run 2, USAR team 2|(% style="width:442px" %)(((
95 95  The OWL indoor drone first explores the collapsed structure and streams its findings to the Team Leader. Based on this reconnaissance, the USAR team enters, searches for victims, responds to emergencies, and conducts rescues while the Team Leader maintains situational awareness through the digital support system.
96 96  )))|(% style="width:238px" %)[[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]]
97 97  |(% style="width:166px" %)Run 3, USAR team 1|(% style="width:442px" %)(((
98 98  The outdoor drone assesses the scene, SNAKE inspects the interior, and ANYmal handles hazardous intervention tasks. Using the information gathered by these robotic systems, the USAR team enters, locates victims, and performs the rescue while the Team Leader maintains overall situational awareness and coordination.
99 -)))|(% style="width:238px" %)[[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]] 
100 -Although the robot didn't explore inside.
99 +)))|(% style="width:238px" %)[[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]]
101 101  
102 102  == 4. Raw results ==
103 103  
... ... @@ -105,28 +105,23 @@
105 105  
106 106  Note: The measures are defined in [[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]]  and [[x. Measures>>3\. Evaluation.Measures.WebHome]]
107 107  
108 -|(% style="width:376px" %)**Measure**|(% style="width:225px" %)**Results**|**Connected Claim**|**Claim proven?**
109 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Safe path chosen|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL01 Improve safety for responders |
110 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Decision quality|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL01 Improve safety for responders |
111 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Near-incident and incident reports|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL01 Improve safety for responders |
112 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Reported hazards, victims, layout correctness, based on robot intel before FR entry|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL02 Increased SA|
113 -|(% style="width:376px" %)How optimal was the FR path|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL02 Increased SA|
114 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Reported hazards, victims, layout correctness, after FR entry|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL02 Increased SA|
115 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Workload: e.g. NASA-TLX|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL03 improved mission effectiveness|
116 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Appropriate trust in technology: e.g. trust survey|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL04 acceptable workload|
117 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Decision confidence: e.g. Retrospective decision quality rating|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL04 acceptable workload|
118 -|(% style="width:376px" %)?|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL05 Trustworthy SA|
119 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Health indicators such as HR, temperature, etc.|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL06 Improved FR health|
120 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Health issues tackled in acceptable time|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL06 Improved FR health|
121 -|(% style="width:376px" %)Total mission completion time|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL07 Degraded mission efficiency|
122 -|(% style="width:376px" %)First responder time inside|(% style="width:225px" %) |CL07 Degraded mission efficiency|
107 +|(% style="width:406px" %)**Measure**|(% style="width:195px" %)**Results**|**Connected Claim**
108 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Safe path chosen|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL01 Improve safety for responders
109 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Decision quality|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL01 Improve safety for responders
110 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Near-incident and incident reports|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL01 Improve safety for responders
111 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Reported hazards, victims, layout correctness, based on robot intel before FR entry|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL02 Increased SA
112 +|(% style="width:406px" %)How optimal was the FR path|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL02 Increased SA
113 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Reported hazards, victims, layout correctness, after FR entry|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL02 Increased SA
114 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Workload: e.g. NASA-TLX|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL03 improved mission effectiveness
115 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Appropriate trust in technology: e.g. trust survey|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL04 acceptable workload
116 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Decision confidence: e.g. Retrospective decision quality rating|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL04 acceptable workload
117 +|(% style="width:406px" %)?|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL05 Trustworthy SA
118 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Health indicators such as HR, temperature, etc.|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL06 Improved FR health
119 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Health issues tackled in acceptable time|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL06 Improved FR health
120 +|(% style="width:406px" %)Total mission completion time|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL07 Degraded mission efficiency
121 +|(% style="width:406px" %)First responder time inside|(% style="width:195px" %) |CL07 Degraded mission efficiency
123 123  
124 -=== 5. Pros and cons for TDP ===
125 125  
126 -[[TDP2 — Robots First, Then Humans Protocol>>2\. Specification.Requirements.TDP2 — Robots First, Then Humans Protocol.WebHome]]
127 127  
128 -|**Pro / Con**|**Results**|**Pro / Con proven?**
129 -| | |
130 -| | |
131 131  
132 132