Skip to Content
Version 2.2 by Rosa Van Tuijn on 2026/03/24 16:00
Show last authors
1 **Experiment title**
2 System baseline test
3
4
5 **2. Objective / Research Question**
6 Do the SYNERGISE technologies together improve the SYNERGISE [[Objectives>>2\. Specification.Objectives.WebHome]] (stated below) without negative effects?
7
8 1. Mission effectiveness
9 1. Mission efficiency
10 1. FR Health
11 1. FR and victim safety
12
13 **3. Hypotheses / Expectations (optional)**
14 See the claims from [[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]], being:
15
16 * CL01: Improve safety for responders
17 * CL02: Increased SA
18 * CL03: Improved mission effectiveness
19 * CL04: acceptable workload
20 * CL05: trustworthy SA
21 * CL06: improved FR health
22 * CL07: degraded mission efficiency
23
24 **4. Scenario / Context**
25 ASR3: Detailed indoor exploration
26
27 Preconditions from [[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]] :
28
29 * Structure is flagged as (relatively?) **safe for direct human entry**; sector/ worksite allocated.
30 * **FRs wearables** distributed, connected, and calibrated.
31 * Specific to scenario with ANYmal:
32 ** **ANYmal **is mission-ready (battery, controls, and payload checked).
33 ** **C3I is online**, role-based views are configurated (Operator/ Analyst/ Team leader/ Safety officer); **5G pods** are installed for connection.
34
35 **5. Participants**
36
37 * FR team ROBOT:
38 ** 1x Squad leaders
39 ** 1x Robot operator
40 ** 1x Robot analyst
41 ** 2x First responder
42 * FR team HUMAN:
43 ** 1x Squad leaders
44 ** 2x First reponder
45 * Base of Operations:
46 ** 1x Safety officer / medical specialist
47 ** Team lead
48
49 Number of participants: 9 
50
51
52 **6. System(s) Under Test**
53
54 |(% style="width:267px" %)Technology|(% style="width:1250px" %)Description
55 |(% style="width:267px" %)ANYmal|(% style="width:1250px" %)(((
56 * Robust mobility over uneven terrain (stairs, debris, slopes).
57 * Multi-sensor payload (video, LIDAR, thermal??)
58 * Reliable wireless communication/ connection in degraded environments.
59 * Support for tele‑operation with clear operator feedback.
60 * Link with C3I, such as adding victims as pin on map.
61 * NO autonomy.
62 )))
63 |(% style="width:267px" %)C3I (BoO and tablet version)|(% style="width:1250px" %)(((
64 * Interoperability with health and location sensors.
65 * Robust operation under limited connectivity (sync when possible).
66 * Usable tablet interface for field conditions (gloves, stress, time pressure).
67 )))
68 |(% style="width:267px" %)Health sensors|(% style="width:1250px" %)(((
69 * Accurate and reliable physiological sensing (e.g. heart rate, exertion proxies).
70 * Comfortable, non‑intrusive form factor suitable for long missions.
71 * Secure wireless data transmission to C3I systems.
72 * Real‑time alerting and trend monitoring.
73 )))
74 |(% style="width:267px" %)Location sensors|(% style="width:1250px" %)(((
75 * Indoor and outdoor localisation capability.
76 * Sufficient accuracy and update rate for safety‑critical use.
77 * Integration with C3I and mapping systems.
78 * Robustness to environmental interference (dust, debris, structures, height differences).
79 )))
80
81
82
83 **7. Tasks**
84
85 [[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]]
86
87 [[UC04.4: Detailed indoor exploration without ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYmal (USAR).WebHome]] 
88
89
90 **8. Experimental Conditions / Variants**
91
92 Two buildings:
93
94 * Building A: Easier location, obstacles and environmental conditions. (clear visibility, ..)
95 * Building B: Challenging location, obstacles and environmental conditions for humans and robots (e.g. smoke and obstacles).
96
97 Trial 1:
98
99 * FR Team ROBOT does Building A
100 * FR team HUMAN does Building B
101
102 Trial 2:
103
104 * FR Team ROBOT does Building B
105 * FR team HUMAN does Building A
106
107 **9. Measurements**
108
109 See the measurements from [[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]]. Compare outcomes between the two conditions teams if applicable.
110
111 |**Claim: Safety**|**Measurment(s)**|**How to test **
112 |Safer decision before entry|Safe path chosen|(((
113 * Define ground-truth safe path(s) beforehand so that they can be compared to chosen entry path during the trial
114 * Score paths beforehand: safe/ suboptimal/ unsafe
115 )))
116 |Better decision overall|"How good were you decisions looking back?"|(((
117 * Hotwash reflection question (likert + open)
118 * Observations of errors (e.g. near-incidents, unsafe choices)
119 )))
120 |Fewer dangerous situations|Near-incident reports|(((
121 * Define hazards in buildings beforehand and check (with observations of during hotwash) if these hazards are avoided or not
122 )))
123
124 |**Claim: Efficiency**|**Measurment(s)**|**How to test **
125 |Faster mission execution|Total mission completion time|(((
126 * Timestamp of start (after briefing) till all located victims have been extracted
127 )))
128 |Faster inside performance|First responder time inside|(((
129 * Timestamp of entry building till exist building (last located victim is exstracted)
130 )))
131
132 |**Claim: Situation Awareness**|**Measurment(s)**|**How to test **
133 |Before entry |(((
134 Correctness of reported hazards, victims, layout
135 )))|(((
136
137 )))
138 |During entry|(((
139 FR path logs
140 )))|(((
141
142 )))
143 |After mission|(((
144 Correctness of reported hazards, victims, layout
145 )))|
146
147
148
149 **10. Procedure (Step-by-Step)**
150
151 1. __Team preparation__:
152 11. FR team ROBOT is trained in operating the robot, analysing the camera stream, and pinning information on C3I
153 11. Squad leader and BoO are trained for both teams in interpreting the health and location sensor data.
154 11. Experiment leader knows where hazards and victims are in both buildings.
155 11. Anymal robot is tested with network in target buildings for experiment (without FR themselves seeing building!)
156 1. __Experiment preparation:__
157 11. Building is prepped with victims, hazards, etc.
158 1. __Briefing:__
159 11. Same for both teams for both building types: Building has been inspected from outside and is estimated safe for entry. Situation inside unknown. Victims possibly present. Goal: find, assess, and extract victims while avoiding and mapping hazards.
160 11. One person is notified that their health sensor will be triggered during the Building B (difficult building) situation.
161 1. __Execution:__
162 11. For FR team ROBOT, see: [[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]]
163 11. For FR team HUMAN, see: [[UC04.4: Detailed indoor exploration without ANYMAL (USAR)>>2\. Specification.b\. Use Cases.UC04\.0\: Detailed indoor exploration.UC04\.3\: Detailed indoor exploration with ANYmal (USAR).WebHome]]
164 11. During execution of both teams, performance will be measured by experiment leader:
165 111. Mission completion time
166 111. Health indicators stay within acceptable range
167 111. Time for tackling any health alerts
168 111. Track FR path
169 1. __Hotwash__:
170 11. Questions (specified per role, couple questions per topic) on:
171 111. Near-incident report
172 111. Path inside
173 111. FR location and status of hazards, victims, and layout
174 111. Mission effectiveness: e.g. self reported effectiveness of decisions
175 111. Self-reported workload
176 111. Trust survey
177 11. Group discussion with feedback
178
179 **~11. Planning:**
180
181 * Team preparation: Day before. 1 hour.
182 * Trial 1:
183 ** Setup scenario: Test day 1. 09:00 - 09:30
184 ** Setup tech and perform checks: Test day 1. 09:00 - 09:30
185 ** Briefing of each team individually (outside building): Test day 1: 09:00 - 09:30
186 ** Mission execution: Test day 1. 09:30 - 10:30
187 ** Hot wash: Test day 1. 10:30-11:00
188 ** Scenario reset: test day 1. 10:30-11:00
189 * Teams switch location: Test day 1. 11:00-11:15
190 * Trial 2: 
191 ** (Setup scenario: Test day 1. 12:30 - 13:00)
192 ** Setup tech and perform checks: Test day 1. 12:30 - 13:00
193 ** Briefing of each team individually (outside building): Test day 1: 12:30 - 13:00
194 ** Mission execution: Test day 1. 13:00 - 14:00
195 ** Hot wash: Test day 1. 14:00-14:30
196 * Cleanup area and store tech. 14:00-14:30
197
198
199
200 **12. Materials**
201
202 * For FRs:
203 ** 1x Anymal with teleop setup and networking
204 ** 2x Tablet with C3I for squad leader (one spare)
205 ** 1x Base of Operations with computer with C3I
206 ** 4x Health sensors
207 ** 4x Location sensors
208 ** 8x walky talky with two channels (?) (for FR team and BoO).
209 * For usecase:
210 ** 2x training building (~~100m2?)
211 ** Enviromental challenges: smoke machine, obstacles, etc.
212 ** ~~8x Actors or dummies for victims.
213 * 8x Clipboards with papers and pens for hotwash and questionnaires
214
215 **13. Dependencies**
216
217 * Availability of materials
218 * Availability and functioning of ANYmal robot with teleoperation and network in target buildings
219 * Availability of functioning network between robot, FRs, and BoO.
220 * Availability of:
221 ** Experiment participants
222 ** People willing to play victim
223 ** Experiment leaders
224
225 **14. Success Criteria**
226 When mission(s) completed by both teams, and we can compare their performance using the metrics.
227
228
229