Search for: All records

The Institute for Student‐AI Teaming (iSAT) addresses the foundational question:how to promote deep conceptual learning via rich socio‐collaborative learning experiences for all students?—a question that is ripe for AI‐based facilitation and has the potential to transform classrooms. We advance research in speech, computer vision, human‐agent teaming, computer‐supported collaborative learning, expansive co‐design, and the science of broadening participation to design and study next generation AI technologies (called AI Partners) embedded in student collaborative learning teams in coordination with teachers. Our institute ascribes to theoretical perspectives that aim to create a normative environment of widespread engagement through responsible design of technology, curriculum, and pedagogy in partnership with K–12 educators, racially diverse students, parents, and other community members.

Resilient teams overcome sudden, dynamic changes by enacting rapid, adaptive responses that maintain system effectiveness. We analyzed two experiments on human-autonomy teams (HATs) operating a simulated remotely piloted aircraft system (RPAS) and correlated dynamical measures of resilience with measures of team performance. Across both experiments, HATs experienced automation and autonomy failures, using a Wizard of Oz paradigm. Team performance was measured in multiple ways, using a mission-level performance score, a target processing efficiency score, a failure overcome score, and a ground truth resilience score. Novel dynamical systems metrics of resilience measured the timing of system reorganization in response to failures across RPAS layers, including vehicle, controls, communications layers, and the system overall. Time to achieve extreme values of reorganization and novelty of reorganization were consistently correlated with target processing efficiency and ground truth resilience across both studies. Correlations with mission-level performance and the overcome score were apparent but less consistent. Across both studies, teams displayed greater system reorganization during failures compared to routine task conditions. The second experiment revealed differential effects of team training focused on coordination coaching and trust calibration. These results inform the measurement and training of resilience in HATs using objective, real-time resilience analysis.