ML25175A100

Function Allocation: Myths, Process, and Emerging Methods (Presentation)

ML25175A100
Person / Time
Issue date:	06/23/2025
From:	Dickerson K, Hartle B, Kovesdi C, Watkins H NRC/RES/DRA, NRC/RES/DRA/HFRB
To:
References
Download: ML25175A100 (1)

Text

Function Allocation: Myths, Process, and Emerging Methods Kelly Dickerson, Heather Watkins, Brandon Hartle, and Casey Kovesdi

Overview

• Background

• Methods

• Preliminary findings

• Next steps

Function Allocation Is complete system automation mandatory?

Is complete system automation possible?

Asks If the answer to either question is no, function allocation is needed.

Function Allocation

• The division of tasks between Humans Automation System

Early Methods: Fitts List Humans are better at Machines are better at Detecting small amounts of visual or acoustic energy just noticeable differences (JNDs).

Responding quickly to control signals and applying great force smoothly and precisely.

Perceiving patterns of light and sound.

Performing repetitive/routine tasks.

Improvising/using flexible procedures.

Storing information briefly and then erasing it completely.

Storing a very large amount of information for a very long period of time and recalling relevant facts at the appropriate time.

Reasoning deductively, including computational ability.

Reasoning inductively.

Handling highly complex operations (i.e., doing many different things at once).

Exercising judgment.

Technology has changed significantly since 1951, how has this allocation and allocation methods changed over time?

Why this matters The NRC requires applicants demonstrate state of the art in human factors engineering methods and programs.

Chapter 4 of NUREG-0711 documents the review criteria for FA and functional requirements analysis.

Use of a structured, documented methodology The use of an iterative allocation process Inclusion of a functional hierarchy description, including (as appropriate) goals, functions, processes, and systems Identification of requirements for the purpose, conditions, and parameters of high-level functions Allocation to a level of automation and technical bases for all allocations Consideration of both primary and non-primary allocations Description of the overall role of personnel Verification that all needed high level functions and requirements are identified and that the allocation of functions takes advantage of human strengths and avoids weakness

Technical basis for function allocation methods:

• NUREG/CR-3331 was published in 1983.

• New plants have significantly more digital technologies than older plants. It is not clear if methods described in NUREG/CR-3331 can be applied to advanced digital technologies.

How has state of the art changed since the publication of guidance on FA methods?

Objectives

• Determine what methods and theories on FA are available and update NRCs guidance, this project conducted a systematic literature review.

• The review aimed to uncover the characteristics of available methods and understand how much has changed since the last guidance was published.

Systematic Literature Review Definition

• A systematic method for collecting, evaluating, integrating, and presenting information from multiple sources.

• Follows a pre-defined method of searching, filtering, reviewing, critiquing, and interpreting findings from a topic or domain.

Research Questions

• Based on the criteria for this review, how many studies have been published on function allocation since 1983?

• What is the distribution of nuclear and non-nuclear domain papers on FA/FRA?

• What is the distribution of FA literature across publication types?

Methods: Platform Labels supporting filtering Title and abstract window List of source records Project progress statistics Reviewer notes Reviewer decisions

Methods: Databases 15 databases were identified as suitable.

3 selected for this stage of the review.

Methods: Search Terms

• Terms selected based on a pilot search of the literature.

• 64 terms included.

• 10 terms excluded.

• Results from terms yielding greater than 1000 hits per database excluded.

Methods: Inclusion Criteria Published between 1983-2024.

Contains empirical, theoretical, methodological, or conceptual research.

Is a journal, book, white/gray paper, technical report, standard, or other primary source (including systematic reviews and proceedings/conference papers).

Written in English.

Full text is available.

Domain discussed is described in either NUREG/CR-3331 or NUREG/CR-2623.

Additional domains include autonomous vehicles (ground, sky, and space), driving, nuclear, oil and gas, maritime, manned aviation, command and control, industrial or process control and spaceflight operations.

Studies that could be applicable to remote operations, or that contain methods or results that can be applied to safety critical systems.

Must be relevant to one or more of the research questions.

Methods: Exclusion Criteria FA in reference to the allocation of governmental functions across municipalities.

Non-technical sources (e.g., workshop, meeting, training/meeting summaries).

General background material on human factors and/or systems engineering broadly.

Focus was system, user interface, or user experience design methods.

Functional allocation of business processes.

Primary focus was trust or an affective response to the division of tasks between humans and automation.

Sources focused on special populations (e.g., children, cancer patients, the elderly).

Opinion papers and those with erratum or corrections were excluded.

Sources that included the term human centered or human centered design in the title that did not also have the terms automation, robotics (or analogous).

Focus on legal or ethical implications of AI or automation.

Medical human factors literature was excluded because it did not generalize to nuclear.

Methods: Screening

• All criteria were applied to the title, abstract, and full text material.

• Screening of titles and abstracts occurred in Rayyan. As of now, all full text screening has been off platform (spreadsheet).

Methods: Screening Magnitude

• After de-duplication there were 8,729 records to screen based on title.

• 2,088 records moved forward and were screened based on their abstracts.

• 638 records moved forward to light full text screening.

• 152 records moved forward to full text review and analysis.

• 48 records have been fully analyzed and relevant material added.

Screening Example

Preliminary Results: Topic Popularity 0

2 4

6 8

10 12 14 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 FREQUENCY YEAR

Preliminary Results: Research Venues 0

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Journal Conference Proceedings Book Chapter Technical Report Dissertation Book FREQUENCY PUBLICATION TYPE

Preliminary Results: Methodological Landscape 0

2 4

6 8

10 12 14 16 18 20 Qualitative Quantitative Mixed Methods No Method Specified FREQUENCY METHODOLOGY CATEGORIES 40%

17%

38%

6%

Preliminary Results: Where is FA in the FA literature?

• Only 3.8% of the abstracts used the term function allocation.

• < 1% used the term dynamic allocation.

• FA papers tend to focus on specific contexts and domains.

Abstracts may have focused on these factors more than FA specifically.

Preliminary Results: Keeping humans in the loop

• 17 out of 48 papers reviewed to date advocated for dynamic/adaptive allocation.

• Some of these papers also argued that while tasks can shift dynamically, authority for decision making should remain with the human.

• A risk to this approach is that the humans will likely retain control only under the most difficult conditions, which would make automation look more reliable and humans look less reliable.

Conclusions

• Since Fitts List, the FA literature has moved towards a complementary perspective on human-automation collaboration.

• Cooperative perspectives on allocation tend to advocate for dynamic FA.

• In general, most of the papers reviewed were a mix of qualitative and quantitative approaches and advocated for a more contemporary view of the capabilities of automation technology.

Want to keep up with this project and access the literature uncovered by the literature? Scan the QR code for access to our box folder.