© 1995 08 My home page my publications


This page has bibliographic data, authorship, abstract, content links, and references.
The main text is on a separate page.


Grant, S. (1995b) Safety systems and cognitive models. In: Proc. 5th International Conference on Human-Machine Interaction and Artificial Intelligence in Aerospace (HMI-AI-AS'95), Toulouse, France. September 27 - 29. Organized by EURISCO, 4 Avenue Edouard Belin, F-31400 Toulouse, France.


Simon Grant
European Commission, Joint Research Centre
Institute for Systems Engineering and Informatics
T. P. 210, 21020 Ispra (VA), Italy
(now self-employed)


Category: theory.

An original classification of technological safety systems is presented, for the purpose of assessing the actual or possible contribution of models of cognition to the design and operation of these systems. Systems are classified as passive or active; active as responsive or autonomous; autonomous as usual or unusual; unusual as dormant or latent; and latent as danger-centred or cognition-centred. For passive systems, cognitive models are of limited use. For responsive and usual systems relevant models are beyond reach. For dormant and danger-centred systems, models of cognitive capacity, load or control mode may be relevant. A good cognition-centred system would benefit from a contextual model that identifies the boundaries of what is usual or familiar. Such a model, and a related safety-system concept, SACHE, are outlined.

Keywords: safety; system; classification; cognition; cognitive; model; simulation.


1 Introduction

2 Classification of safety systems

2.1 The dimension passive / active

2.2 The dimension responsive / autonomous

2.3 The dimension usual / unusual

2.4 The dimension dormant / latent

2.5 The dimension danger-centred / cognition-centred

3 Some theory for cognition-centred safety systems

4 SACHE: a concept for a cognition-centred safety system

5 Conclusion


[BAINBRIDGE 92] L. Bainbridge, Mental Models and Cognitive Skill: The Case of Industrial Process Operation. In Y. Rogers, A. Rutherford and P. Bibby (eds), Models in the Mind. London: Academic Press, 1992.

[BAINBRIDGE 94] L. Bainbridge, Context and Complexity in Dynamic Tasks. Discussion document obtained from the author, 1994.

[BIGNELL 84] V. Bignell and J. Fortune, Understanding Systems Failures. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press, 1984.

[BOY 91] G. Boy, Intelligent Assistant Systems. London: Academic Press, 1991.

[CACCIABUE 92] P. C. Cacciabue, F. Decortis, B. Drozdowicz, M. Masson and J.P. Nordvik. COSIMO: A Cognitive Simulation Model of Human Decision Making and Behavior in Accident Management of Complex Plants. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics , 22 (5), 1058-1074, 1992.

[CACCIABUE 94] P. C. Cacciabue, Academic and Practical Needs for Operator Modelling and Simulation. Report ISEI/IE 2794/94, European Commission, JRC, ISEI, 21020 Ispra (VA) Italy.

[GRANT 91] S. Grant and T. Mayes, Cognitive Task Analysis? In G. R. S. Weir and J. L. Alty (eds), Human-Computer Interaction and Complex Systems. London: Academic Press, 1991.

[GRANT 95] S. Grant, Aiding decisions by recognising unexpected situations. In Proceedings CSAPC'95, Espoo, Finland, August 1995.

[HOLLNAGEL 93] E. Hollnagel, Human Reliability Analysis, Context and Control. London: Academic Press, 1993.

[PREVOT 93] T. Prevot and R. Onken, On-board Interactive Flight Planning and Decision Making with the Cockpit Assistant System CASSY. In Proceedings HMI-AI-AS'93, Toulouse, France, September 1993.

[REASON 90] J. Reason, Human Error. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

[SARTER 91] N. B. Sarter and D. D. Woods, Situation Awareness: A Critical But Ill-Defined Phenomenon. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1 (1), 45-57, 1991.

[WILDE 88] G. J. S. Wilde, Risk Homeostasis Theory and Traffic Accidents-Propositions, Deductions and Discussion of Dissension in Recent Reactions. Ergonomics, 31 (4), 441-468, 1988. (see also "Target Risk".)

Top Main text
© 1995 06 My home page My publications