Human-AI Teaming
STATE-OF-THE-ART AND
RESEARCH NEEDS
Committee on Human-System Integration Research Topics
for the 711th Human Performance Wing
of the Air Force Research Laboratory
Board on Human-Systems Integration
Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by contract number WBSRA-21-10-NAS between the National Academy of Sciences and the Wright Brothers Institute as a subcontract to the Air Force Research Laboratory. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project. Also supporting the Committee’s work are the Board on Human-System Integration core sponsorship grants with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, U.S. Army Research Laboratory, the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, and the Society for Human Resource Management.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-27017-5
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-27017-0
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26355
Additional copies of this publication are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Human-AI Teaming: State-of-the-Art and Research Needs. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26355.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON HUMAN-SYSTEM INTEGRATION RESEARCH TOPICS FOR THE 711TH HUMAN PERFORMANCE WING OF THE AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY
MICA R. ENDSLEY (Chair), SA Technologies
BARRETT S. CALDWELL, Purdue University
ERIN K. CHIOU, Arizona State University
NANCY J. COOKE, Arizona State University
MARY L. CUMMINGS, Duke University
CLEOTILDE GONZALEZ, Carnegie Mellon University
JOHN D. LEE, University of Wisconsin-Madison
NATHAN J. MCNEESE, Clemson University
CHRISTOPHER MILLER, Smart Information Flow Technologies
EMILIE ROTH, Roth Cognitive Engineering
WILLIAM B. ROUSE, NAE, Georgetown University
Staff
DANIEL TALMAGE, Study Director
BOARD ON HUMAN-SYSTEMS INTEGRATION
FREDERICK OSWALD (Chair), Department of Psychology, Rice University
JAMES BAGIAN, NAE/NAM, Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
DIANA BURLEY, Graduate School of Education and Human Development, George Washington University
BARBARA DOSHER, NAS, School of Social Sciences, University of California, Irvine
MICA ENDSLEY, SA Technologies, Mesa, Arizona
EDMOND ISRAELSKI, AbbVie, North Chicago, Illinois
JOHN LOCKETT, U.S. Army Research Laboratory (Retired)
NAJMEDIN MESHKATI, Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California
EMILIE ROTH, Roth Cognitive Engineering, Stanford, California
WILLIAM J. STRICKLAND, Human Resources Research Organization, Alexandria, Virginia
MATTHEW WEINGER, Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Staff
MARY ELLEN O’CONNELL, Interim Director
TOBY M. WARDEN, Director (Until 5/25/2021)
Preface
Artificial intelligence (AI) is being proposed as a force multiplier for the military. AI brings its own unique challenges, however, which must be balanced with effective human oversight, particularly in operations with high-consequence outcomes. AI therefore needs to work effectively as a part of a distributed team. This report addresses the state-of-the-art in human-AI teaming and establishes a framework for future research to meet the goal of effective use of AI for future defense operations.
I wish to express my deep appreciation to the members of the committee for their diligent and dedicated contributions. The committee’s expertise and knowledge were indispensable throughout our deliberations and the writing of the report. Their efforts, which often required working nights and weekends, are particularly notable given the incredibly challenging year. I cannot thank them enough. On behalf of the entire committee, I also wish to thank the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine staff for their outstanding support and guidance. I am also deeply appreciative to Heather Kreidler for her writing and fact checking. The report benefited deeply from the editing skills of Susan Debad. Additionally, I want to express our sincere gratitude to everyone who contributed their time, expertise, and experiences to our committee, especially all the workshop presenters and attendees. The presentations, resources, and insights contributed immensely to our deliberations. Finally, I wish to thank the Air Force Research Laboratory for their partnership and forthright participation throughout this process. I offer this report in the spirit of that partnership and believe that the research areas discussed in the report will be useful to the sponsor as they move forward.
Mica Endsley, Chair
Committee on Human-System Integration Research Topics for the 711th Human Performance Wing of the Air Force Research Laboratory
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Robert F. Sproull, Adjunct Professor, Manning College of Information & Computer Sciences, University of Massachusetts at Amherst and Julie J.C.H. Ryan, Chief Executive Officer, Wyndrose Technical Group. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of the report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
Study Background and Charge to the Committee
Effect of AI on Human Performance
2 HUMAN-AI TEAMING METHODS AND MODELS
Human-AI Teaming Models and Perspectives
Improved Models for Human-AI Teams
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
3 HUMAN-AI TEAMING PROCESSES AND EFFECTIVENESS
What Does It Mean for AI to Be a Teammate?
Processes and Characteristics of Effective Human-AI Teams
Communication and Coordination
Other Features of Effective Teams
4 SITUATION AWARENESS IN HUMAN-AI TEAMS
Situation Awareness in Multi-Domain Operations
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
5 AI TRANSPARENCY AND EXPLAINABILITY
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Other Human-AI Team Interaction Issues
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Trust Frameworks Past and Present
Trusting AI in Complex Work Environments
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
8 IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF BIAS IN HUMAN-AI TEAMS
Human-Human Team Training to Inform Human-AI Team Training
Training Content: Taskwork and Teamwork
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
10 HSI PROCESSES AND MEASURES OF HUMAN-AI TEAM COLLABORATION AND PERFORMANCE
Taking an HSI Perspective in Human-AI Team Design and Implementation
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Requirements for Research in Human-AI Team Development
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
HSI Considerations for Human-AI Teams
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Human-AI Team Research Testbeds
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Human-AI Team Measures and Metrics
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
Agile Software Development and HSI
Key Challenges and Research Gaps
