Abstract
In this paper, we show that modal logic is a valuable tool for the formal analysis of human errors in aviation safety. We develop a modal logic called agent safety logic (ASL), based on epistemic logic, doxastic logic, and a safety logic grounded in a flight safety manual. We identify a class of human error that has contributed to several aviation incidents involving a specific kind of pilot knowledge failure and formally analyze it. The use of ASL suggests how future avionics might increase aircraft safety.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A Euclidean relation is defined as follows, for any relation R, and elements x, y, z, if \(({x},{y}) \in {R}\), and \(({x}, {z}) \in {R}\), then \(({y}, {z}) \in {R}\).
We use \( Agent \) because the logic can apply to more than just pilots.
A special case is if the \( FSM (\alpha )\) simplifies to complementary conjunctions, in which case \(\chi \) is their disjunction.
Sometimes pilots will take “unsafe” action to mitigate what they perceive to be the greatest safety concern. For our purposes, we consider the action’s warrant in terms of the all-things-considered safety of the plane.
References
Allwein G, Harrison WL (2010) Partially-ordered modalities. Adv Modal Logic 8:1–21
Aumann RJ (1999) Interactive epistemology i: knowledge. Int J Game Theory 28:263–300
Aumann RJ, Brandenburer A (1995) Epistemic conditions for nash equilibrium. Econometrica 63:1161–1180
BEA (2012) Final report on the accident on 1st June 2009 to the airbus a330-203 registered F-GZCP operated by air France flight AF 447 Rio de Janeiro - Paris. Technical report
Blackburn P, de Rijke M, Venema Y (2001) Modal logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Bolton ML, Bass EJ, Siminiceanu RI (2013) Using formal verification to evaluate human–automation interaction: a review. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 43(3):488–503
Bolton ML, Siminiceanu RI, Bass EJ (2011) A systematic approach to model checking human–automation interaction using task analytic models. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum 41(5):961–976
Bredereke J, Lankenau A (2002) A rigorous view of mode confusion. In: Proceedings of SafeComp p 1
Broersen J (2011) Deontic epistemic stit-logic distinguishing modes of mens rea. J Appl Logic 2(9):127–252
Butler RW, Miller SP, Potts JN, Carreno VA (1998) A formal methods approach to the analysis of mode confusion. In: 17th digital avionics systems conference proceedings, p 1
Chen YC, Ely JC, Luo X (2012) Note on unawareness: negative introspection versus AU introspection (KU introspection). Int J Game Theory 41:325–329
Combefis S (2013) A formal framework for the analysis of human–machine interactions. Ph.D. thesis, Universite catholique de Louvain
DGAC (1996) Reporte final accidente aereo birgenair, vuelo alw-301, Febrero 06, 1996. Technical report
Director General of Air Transport (1996) Accident of the boeing 757-200 aircraft operated by empresa de transporte aereo del peru s.a. aeroperu. Technical report, Ministry of Transport, Communications, Housing and Construction
Fagin R, Halpern JY, Moses Y, Vardi MY (2003) Reasoning about knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge
Hintikka J (1962) Knowledge and belief: an introduction to the logic of the two notions. Cornell University Press, Ithaca
Horty JF (2001) Agency and deontic logic. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Hughes G, Cresswell M (1996) A new introduction to modal logic. Routledge, London
Hunter J, Raimondi F, Rungta N, Stocker R (2013) A synergistic and extensible framework for multi-agent system verification. In: Proceedings of the 2013 international conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems, pp 869–876
Hwang MI, Lin JW (1999) Information dimension, information overload and decision quality. J Inf Sci 25:213–218
Langewiesche W (1998) Inside the sky. Pantheon Books, New York
Meyer JJC (2003) Handbook of philosophical logic, chapter modal epistemic and doxastic logic. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 1–38
Network AS (2014) ASN aircraft accident boeing 747-237b vt-ebd arabian sea, off bandra. https://www.aviation-safety.net
Oishi M, Mitchell I, Bayen A, Tomlin C (2002) Hybrid verification of an interface for an automatic landing. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on decision and control, p 1
Palmer B (2013) Understanding Air France 447. William Palmer, Staffordshire
Rushby J (2002) Using model checking to help discover mode confusions and other automation surprises. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 75:167–177
Rushby J, Crow J, Palmer E (1999) An automated method to detect mode confusions. In: 18th digital avionics systems conference proceedings, p 1
Simpson CW, Prusak L (1995) Troubles with information overload—moving from quantity to quality in information provision. Int J Inf Manag 15:413–425
Van Benthem J (2010) Modal logic for open minds. CSLI lecture notes. Center for the Study of Language and Information
van Ditmarsch H, Halpern JY, van der Hoek W, Kooi B (eds) (2015) Handbook of epistemic logic. College Publications, London
Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge Kelly Hayhurst and C. Michael Holloway for their insights on safety. We would also like to thank Aaron Dutle for helping us improve the presentation of the mathematical results in the paper. We especially acknowledge Brenton Weathered for his valuable insights in interpreting accident reports and helping us understand pilot behavior.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ahrenbach, S., Goodloe, A. Formal analysis of pilot error with agent safety logic. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 14, 47–58 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-017-0309-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-017-0309-y