Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
enhanced through understanding and accommodating the conditions, values,
and limitations of prospective user communities; some examples are as follows:
a. Developing operational employment concepts in parallel with funda-
mental research. The ideas that generate scientific hypotheses should
also serve to motivate thinking about applications, even if new discov-
eries during the research process result in revisions to initial applica-
tion concepts. How might the interface system be used? Under what
conditions? For what missions? By which operators? The objective is to
prepare solutions early to questions that are sure to be asked by military
planners and users.
b. Soliciting discussion and debate from all user communities. The gen-
eration fundamental precedent and foundation ethics regarding brain-
based systems should necessarily find a place across agencies and
applications. Key individuals and groups should be sought and engaged
to develop early policy for interface employment and its consequences.
c. Establishing, elaborating, or leveraging government transition tools to
reduce risk early in the science process. Military or other agency facili-
ties—having consistent involvement with prospective users—could
provide a persistent (standing) exploration and development arena that
could provide both the socialization of users to new interface science
concepts and the long-term validation testing required to develop con-
fidence in the system. Such technology “nurseries” might also serve to
allow time and experience for operating doctrine to catch up with the
potential of the science.
d. Exploring applications across a wide front. The cultural traditions and
operating conditions that govern the acceptance of new concepts may
differ within and across user communities. A wide engagement can
avoid the seduction of success based on only limited or specialized S&T
introduction. Conversely, the choice of which technology, or which parts
of a technology, to introduce first can impact transition success; early
introduction and shrewd selection in one arena could counter resistance
elsewhere. S&T transition is a tactical, as well as a strategic, effort.
The most relevant analog for transition of CR-NR into operational systems may be
human factors engineering (HFE) and human system integration (HSI) products
(Booher 2003), which directly address human-centric sciences and technologies.
These engineering activities possess methodologies to ensure the effective function-
ing of human-machine systems at all levels and address many of the issues described
here, for example, identifying the need, engaging user communities, defining perfor-
mance metrics, and addressing the full panoply of operational employment issues
(e.g., maintenance, training, etc.). Two relevant lessons from HFE experience are that
•
The user community can often identify novel applications for technologies
before the developers themselves; early engagement pays dividends.
•
Effective transition requires persistent involvement with the operational
environment; success depends on iteration.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search