Achieving Closed‐Loop Control Simulation of Human‐Artefact Interaction: A Comparative Review

Abstract

To include user interactions in simulations of product use, the most common approach is to couple human subjects to simulation models, using hardware interfaces to close the simulation-control loop. Testing with virtual human models could offer a lowcost addition to evaluation with human subjects. This paper explores the possibilities for coupling human and artefact models to achieve fully software-based interaction simulations. We have critically reviewed existing partial solutions to simulate or execute control (both human control and product-embedded control) and compared solutions from literature with a proof-of-concept we have recently developed. Our concept closes all loops, but it does not rely on validated algorithms to predict human decision making and low-level human motor control. For low-level control, validated solutions are available from other approaches. For human decision making, however, validated algorithms exist only to predict the timing but not the reasoning behind it. To identify decision-making schemes beyond what designers can conjecture, testing with human subjects remains indispensable.

Verification of Structure on Model's Eyes-Hands during Signal Tracking

“…This is the validation of hypothesis, described on Fig. 7 and ( 5), (6), that the input to the neuromuscular level is coming from the higher hierarchical levels of the driver's brain. Predictive time constant if has no changes, is coming probably from the regulation level, but instructions for changing Tr has to coming into the regulation level from coordination and organization levels, which is documented on Fig.…”

“…9. Only PI controller is without "prediction" and when we suppose PID controller then transfer function (6) for closed loop has still "second order" structure but is not purely dynamic. Is not derived equation for calculation of time constant, which is in numerator by second order Laplace operator from identified structure (4) until now.…”

Theoretical underpinning and prototype implementation of scenario bundle-based logical control for simulation of human–artifact interaction

“…In their functioning, these components depend on all the other components: (iv) needs (iii), (v) and (viii) need (vi), which in turn needs (i) and (ii). Forerunning surveys pointed out that no commercial software is available to realize these other functionalities [37][38][39]. Nevertheless, we had to implement and adapt these into the proof of concept in some way.…”