EMERGING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR INITIAL AUTOMATED TARGET RECOGNITION (ATR) DISPLAY CONSIDERATIONS: Implications for Concept Development and Evaluation

In light of the Army’s intent to leverage advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) for augmenting dismounted Soldier Lethality through the development of in-scope and Heads-Up Display (HUD)-based Automatic Target Recognition (ATR) systems, the Combat Capabilities Development Command U. S. Army Research Laboratory’s Human Research and Engineering Directorate (CCDC-ARL/HRED) has identified several critical gaps that must be addressed in order to effectively team the Soldier with ATR for the desired augmented Lethality. One of these areas pertains to the way in which ATR is displayed and requires a thorough understanding and leveraging of relevant cognitive processes that will enable use of this technology. Additionally, insufficient consideration of perceptual, attentional, and cognitive capabilities increases the risk of burdening the Soldier with excessive, unnecessary, or distracting representations of information, which may impede Lethality rather than augment it. HRED’s planned and ongoing research is intended to develop novel mechanisms through which Soldiers teamed with ATR will perform more adaptively and effectively than either the Soldier or the intelligent system could accomplish individually. Based on HRED’s significant expertise in the cognitive sciences, coupled with familiarity with the military-relevant domain spaces, the following initial recommendations for ATR information display requirements are made:1.ATR highlighting should leverage a non-binary display schema to continuously encode threat information (e.g., target class/identity, uncertainty, and prioritization).2.ATR highlighting should be integrated with the target itself instead of functioning as a discrete feature of the display (i.e., highlight the target rather than highlighting a region with the target inside).3.Information about threat certainty or classification confidence (which can also include priority) should be embedded into ATR highlighting.4.Yellow highlights may offer advantages for display5.Changing information (e.g., target certainty) should be accomplished through formation or modification of highlight gradients rather than sudden changes in the display.6.Human performance evaluations of ATR should consider the incorporation of changing threat states and contexts into scenarios for more relevant findings.7.Human performance evaluations of ATR should consider the incorporation of uncued (non-highlighted) targets and miscued targets (false identifications; e.g. ATR identifies non-threat as threat) for more relevant findings.