Simulatore di interfaccia uomo-macchina per i controllo di UAV

Recent statistics have demonstrated that two of the most important causes of failures of the UAVs (Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle) missions are related to the low level of decisional autonomy of vehicles and to the man machine interface. Therefore, a relevant issue is to design a display/controls architecture which allows the efficient interaction between the operator and the remote vehicle and to develop a level of automation which allows the vehicle the decision about change in mission. The research presented in this paper focuses on a modular man-machine interface simulator for the UAV control, which simulates UAV missions, developed to experiment solution to this problem. The main components of the simulator are an advanced interface and a block defined automation, which comprehend an algorithm that implements the level of automation of the system. The simulator has been designed and developed following a user-centred design approach in order to take into account the operator’s needs in the communication with the vehicle. The level of automation has been developed following the supervisory control theory which says that the human became a supervisor who sends high level commands, such as part of mission, target, constraints, in then-rule, while the vehicle receives, comprehends and translates such commands into detailed action such as routes or action on the control system. In order to allow the vehicle to calculate and recalculate the safe and efficient route, in term of distance, time and fuel a 3D planning algorithm has been developed. It is based on considering UASs representative of real world systems as objects moving in a virtual environment (terrain, obstacles, and no fly zones) which replicates the airspace. Original obstacle avoidance strategies have been conceived in order to generate mission planes which are consistent with flight rules and with the vehicle performance constraints. The interface is based on a touch screen, used to send high level commands to the vehicle, and a 3D Virtual Display which provides a stereoscopic and augmented visualization of the complex scenario in which the vehicle operates. Furthermore, it is provided with an audio feedback message generator. Simulation tests have been conducted with pilot trainers to evaluate the reliability of the algorithm and the effectiveness and efficiency of the interface in supporting the operator in the supervision of an UAV mission. Results have revealed that the planning algorithm calculate very efficient routes in few seconds, an adequate level of workload is required to command the vehicle and that the 3D based interface provides the operator with a good sense of presence and enhances his awareness of the mission scenario and of the vehicle under his control.

La nutrizione-idratazione artificiale è terapia? All'interfaccia tra scienza, diritto e bioetica, il fine vita in Italia, secondo una prospettiva di comunicazione della scienza post-accademica e Science&Technologies Studies (STS)

The question “artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) is therapy or not?” is one of the key point of end-of-life issues in Italy, since it was (and it is also nowadays) a strategic and crucial point of the Italian Bioethics discussion about the last phases of human life: determining if ANH is therapy implies the possibility of being included in the list of treatments that could be mentioned for refusal within the living will document. But who is entitled to decide and judge if ANH is a therapy or not? Scientists? The Legislator? Judges? Patients? This issue at first sight seems just a matter of science, but at stake there is more than a scientific definition. According to several scholars, we are in the era of post-academic Science, in which Science broaden discussion, production, negotation and decision to other social groups that are not just the scientific communities. In this process, called co-production, on one hand scientific knowledge derives from the interaction between scientists and society at large. On the other hand, science is functional to co-production of social order. The continuous negotation on which science has to be used in social decisions is just the evidence of the mirroring negotation for different way to structure and interpret society. Thus, in the interaction between Science and Law, deciding what kind of Science could be suitable for a specific kind of Law, envisages a well defined idea of society behind this choice. I have analysed both the legislative path (still in progress) in the living will act production in Italy and Eluana Englaro’s judicial case (that somehow collapsed in the living will act negotiation), using official documents (hearings, texts of the official conference, committees comments and ruling texts) and interviewing key actors in the two processes from the science communication point of view (who talks in the name of science? Who defines what is a therapy? And how do they do?), finding support on the theoretical framework of the Science&Technologies Studies (S&TS).