Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3332167.3357100acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesuistConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

Towards Instantaneous Recovery from Autonomous System Failures via Predictive Crowdsourcing

Published: 14 October 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Autonomous systems (e.g., long-distance driverless trucks) aim to reduce the need for people to complete tedious tasks. In many domains, automation is challenging because systems may fail to recognize or comprehend all relevant aspects of its current state. When an unknown or uncertain state is encountered in a mission-critical setting, recovery often requires human intervention or hand-off. However, human intervention is associated with decision (and communication, if remote) delays that prevent recovery in low-latency settings. Instantaneous crowdsourcing approaches that leverage predictive techniques reduce this latency by preparing human responses for possible near future states before they occur. Unfortunately, the number of possible future states can be vast and considering all of them is intractable in all but the simplest of settings. Instead, to reduce the number of states that must later be explored, we propose the approach that uses the crowd to first predict the most relevant or likely future states. We examine the latency and accuracy of crowd workers in a simple future state prediction task, and find that more than half of crowd workers were able to provide accurate answers within one second. Our results show that crowd predictions can filter out critical future states in tasks where decisions are required in less than three seconds.

References

[1]
Michael S. Bernstein, Joel Brandt, Robert C. Miller, and David R. Karger. 2011. Crowds in Two Seconds: Enabling Realtime Crowd-powered Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 33--42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2047196.2047201
[2]
National Transportation Safety Board. 2018. Preliminary report Highway HWY18MH010. https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HWY18MH010-prelim.pdf. (2018). Accessed: 2019-07--10.
[3]
Lee Gomes. 2014. Hidden obstacles for Google's self-driving cars. MIT Technology Review (2014).
[4]
Philip Koopman and Michael Wagner. 2017. Autonomous Vehicle Safety: An Interdisciplinary Challenge. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine 9, 1 (Spring 2017), 90--96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MITS.2016.2583491
[5]
Walter Lasecki, Christopher Miller, Adam Sadilek, Andrew Abumoussa, Donato Borrello, Raja Kushalnagar, and Jeffrey Bigham. 2012. Real-time Captioning by Groups of Non-experts. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 23--34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2380116.2380122
[6]
Walter S. Lasecki, Mitchell Gordon, Danai Koutra, Malte F. Jung, Steven P. Dow, and Jeffrey P. Bigham. 2014. Glance: Rapidly Coding Behavioral Video with the Crowd. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 551--562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2642918.2647367
[7]
Walter S. Lasecki, Kyle I. Murray, Samuel White, Robert C. Miller, and Jeffrey P. Bigham. 2011. Real-time Crowd Control of Existing Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 23--32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2047196.2047200
[8]
Lutz Lorenz, Philipp Kerschbaum, and Josef Schumann. 2014. Designing take over scenarios for automated driving: How does augmented reality support the driver to get back into the loop? Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 58, 1 (2014), 1681--1685. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1541931214581351
[9]
Alan Lundgard, Yiwei Yang, Maya L. Foster, and Walter S. Lasecki. 2018. Bolt: Instantaneous Crowdsourcing via Just-in-Time Training. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 467, 7 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174041
[10]
Elliot Salisbury, Sebastian Stein, and Sarvapali Ramchurn. 2015. Real-time Opinion Aggregation Methods for Crowd Robotics. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS '15). International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Richland, SC, 841--849. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2772879.2773261
[11]
Steven Eric Vozar. 2013. A Framework for Improving the Speed and Performance of Teleoperated Mobile Manipulators. PhD thesis (2013).

Index Terms

  1. Towards Instantaneous Recovery from Autonomous System Failures via Predictive Crowdsourcing

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    UIST '19 Adjunct: Adjunct Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology
    October 2019
    192 pages
    ISBN:9781450368179
    DOI:10.1145/3332167
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 14 October 2019

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. human computation
    2. prediction
    3. real-time crowdsourcing

    Qualifiers

    • Poster

    Funding Sources

    • USDOT Center for Connected and Automated Transportation (CCAT) at the University of Michigan

    Conference

    UIST '19

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 561 of 2,567 submissions, 22%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 102
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)6
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
    Reflects downloads up to 22 Nov 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media