Consilience in Situated Physical Ergonomics

8/12/2019 Consilience in Situated Physical Ergonomics

1/28

NASCENT SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, LLCBRINGING SCIENCE TO LIFE

Consilience in Situated Physical Ergonomics

Toward the Future Perfect Progressive Plural Tense

of Work and Life in the Wild

Prepared for Aptima Inc.

and the

U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research & Development Center

Gary E. Riccio, Ph.D.

August 10, 2012


2/28

Riccio, 10AUG2012 Consilience

1

Programmatic Context for Innovation in Situated Physical Ergonomics

The following text is taken from an Aptima report to the U.S. Army Research,

Development and Engineering Center (Aptima, 2012). It describes the motivation for

Aptimas Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) that was the context for Dr. Riccios

innovations in situated physical ergonomics. A concise report of those innovations

follows. While the work was directed toward an understanding of Soldier tasks andcapabilities, it is applicable to many other tasks in the workplace and in the activities of

daily living.

Full Spectrum Operations demand that the Army be capable of performing

effectively across a wide variety of missions and in a range of environments (e.g.,Headquarters Department of the Army, 2008; 2002/2008). This necessity implies

that small units and individual Soldiers must also be able to perform a wide range

of tasks building on abilities such as problem solving and initiative (e.g., Riccio,

Diedrich, & Cortes, 2010). Indeed, to be successful, the 21stCentury Soldier must

possess competencies including but not limited to character and accountability;

comprehensive fitness; adaptability and initiative; critical thinking and problem

solving; as well as tactical and technical competence (Department of the Army,2011a). Similarly, drawing on these abilities at the Squad level, Soldiers must

work as a team to effectively conduct a range of tasks, in varied contexts, ranging

from conduct attack to conduct low-level information operations to maintain

situational awareness (Department of the Army, 2011b). The challenge, however,

is that performance depends on multiple factors such as previous training,

equipment, teammates, the environment, and the relative abilities of the

adversary.

Accordingly, the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and

Engineering Center (NSRDEC) is investigating the effects of a key factor, load,

on Soldier performance including cognitive, biomechanical, and physiological

influences. Load is an essential issue to understand due to the ever changing toolsthat have accompanied and will continue to accompany modernization of the

battlefield. Almost any introduction of novel equipment impacts Soldier load,

necessitating tradeoffs in mobility, lethality, and survivability. A key challenge

is therefore to understand, anticipate, and facilitate these tradeoffs in order to

optimally impact Soldier and Squad performance

Aptima is working with NSRDEC to develop a framework and associated

measurement library for understanding how effects of load, as measured in the

laboratory, are related to impact on Soldier and Squad behavior. This work is

proceeding through the development of Performance Indicators (PIs), which are

observable behaviors that can be used to assess Soldier and Squad performance.

These PIs are linked to critical Squad tasks, and associated events in the 72 hourscenario, as well as laboratory tasks and measures designed to explore aspects of

cognition and biomechanics that are likely impacted by load. To facilitate

linking of laboratory findings to Soldier and Squad behaviors, the framework

includes a translational layer that provides information regarding context and

Soldier and Squad requirements that impact what must be done, and

consequently, what must be measured. As a result, the framework serves to

enable predictions of how load might affect cognition and biomechanics, and

therefore, how load might impact Soldier and Squad behavior.


3/28


2

Consilience in Situated Physical Ergonomics:

Toward the Future Perfect Progressive Plural Tense of Work and Life in the Wild

The original intent for the work summarized in this report was to integrate

cognitive sciencewith the physical and biological sciences, most notably the

disciplines associated with biomechanics, in ways that can facilitate transition of

research to the field for tasks associated with Soldiering in the contemporaryoperating environment. Making efficacious connections between such research

and reality requires nothing less than crossing the common boundaries between

mind and body, between an individual and the surroundings, between persons

and things, and between initiative and accountability. The theory and

methodology outlined in this report are being developed to help with thesechallenging dimensions of translation.

There are several noteworthy aspects of the approach we are developing. One is

to create a productive synergy between quantitative and qualitative

methodologies so we can utilize both the laboratory and narrative in

understanding the intimate and generative interrelationships between behavior

and experience. The most exciting implication of this nexus is to bring the studyof behavior out of the razors edge of the present into the full expanse of time

that influences human thinking and experience in ways that transcend physical

causality while remaining grounded in the physics of human action in the world.

Another important aspect of this work is the concept of nesting. This is more like

engineering synthesis than scientific analysis but not so starkly as most work in

modeling. Nesting allows us to put together scientific studies ostensibly of

different kindsto appreciate behavior in more realistic or actual settings of work

and life. At the same time, it can generate new directions for analysis that can be

quite focused without being limited to the conventional boundaries of familiar

scientific disciplines. To facilitate nesting, aperiodic tableis presented for

human movement that can be applied to many situations of work and theactivities of daily living.

The periodic table represents an ontology for human movement with concepts

that map across different epistemologies or ways of thinking about human

movement. While the periodic table is a guide to synthesis, the associated

ontology provides a framework within which to catalogue scientific paradigms

and particular studies. A sample of such a transdisciplinary library is included as

an appendix to this report.

1. Leveraging the Cognitive Task Analysis

Aptimas CognitiveTask Analysis (CTA) led to a large number of useful performanceindicators (PI) that, of necessity, are directly relevant to cognition (Aptima, 2012). The

hallmark of human cognition is the ability to comprehend things beyond the moment and

beyond the situation at hand through such processes as remembering, imagining,

anticipating, inductively inferring, inter-temporally reasoning, computationally reasoning,

comparing, deciding, and intending. Biomechanics and other disciplines pertaining to

human movement, on the other hand, are first and foremost about processes that play out

in the moment and in the situation at hand. Thus, the vast majority of PI do not map to a

compact or homogeneous set of physical or biological processes.


4/28


3

Our vision for an integration of cognition with the physical and biological

sciences, in the wild, required a turn and an associated methodological

innovation.

Our transdisciplinary challenge leveraged the fact that the PI are more than a large set of

relevant behavioral observables. They are a highly structured set of observables generallywith subject-predicate-object implications. They are the seeds for telling a story. In fact,

many of the PI were elicited from subject matter experts (SME) in the context of telling

about their first-hand experiences as ground Soldiers and the meaning that these

experiences had for them and others. The 72-hour scenario that provided the backdrop for

Aptimas elicitation of PI inexorably led these experience fragments to be woven intostories. Past, present, and future were intertwined in the discussion of experience

fragments and increasingly so as the richness of the stories evolved across multiple

interactions with SMEs. Issues pertaining to fatigue and thermoregulation, for example,

explicitly emerged in the discussion of time periods on the order of days and three-

dimensional spatial scales on the order of kilometers. It also became clear that cause-

effect relationships among past, present, and future were exceedingly important over

much shorter times scales on the order of seconds to minutes and over spatial scales onthe order of meters, that is, on spatiotemporal scales of more extensive relevance to

human movement science.

One of our methodological innovations was to initiate a process, concurrent with the

CTA, of collaboratively reflecting on experience fragments of our SMEs that pertained to

human movement. Typically, the time scale over which this telling and reflection took

place was longer than the experience that was being described. This allowed us, in a

sense, to get inside the head of the Soldier with respect to the experience of human

movement. We refer to this level of discourse as micro-experiences (Riccio, Diedrich,

& Cortez, 2010). On the foundation of the CTA, our discussion of micro-experiences

allowed us to reflect on movement as task directed and organized, that is, as purposeful

and operationally relevant. We self-consciously tried to talk about these experiencefragments in the progressive tenses. This was not the most natural way to tell a story but,

even when used occasionally, it helped us stay in the moment and avoid lapsing into

third-person descriptions. We also tried to talk about micro-experiences in the second-

person voice but that was more difficult. It required a level of shared experience that

mere conversation could not achieve, thus it required another methodological innovation

(see section 2).

The following vignettes are examples of micro-experiences we discussed, although they

are not literal transcriptions. They are not taken from a single conversation but they

capture the gist of a few themes that cut across several conversations. They are a bit

stylized to emphasize the way we believe the methodology should be used.

Vignette example 1

I am looking at a wall that we would have to move over, around, or

through to reach the house where a high value target (HVT) may be

hiding. I consider that my teammate, who is a breacher, may need two

charges or other special breaching tools to get through the door of the

house because often these houses have double doors, a metal outer door

and a wooden inner door. Our decisions about how to approach the


5/28


4

house, and carrying what, will have been easier if I can get to the house

and check out the situation. I am thinking about the amount of time it

would take to get past the wall in various ways to approach the house in

a timely fashion without being detected. I look over to a relatively new

teammate, he looks back, and we both know what the decision will be

even though we dont have a lot of experience together. We both know

that he will get down on all fours in front of the wall and I will use hisback as a step from which to jump to the top of the wall. I am thinking

about the kit I am carrying, what I am wearing, what I can take over the

wall with me, and how that will affect my movement over the wall.

Vignette example 2

I remember a day when I was getting ready to do my daily PT. I

remember myself remembering how important it was that I was

physically fit for a rush to an objective that followed a long march. Then

I remember being surprised by a thought that seemed at first to have

nothing to do with PT. I remember myself remembering how difficult it

was for me to cut on the uneven terrain with some new kit I was carryingwith me. I felt clumsy and almost slipped and stumbled because of the

unfamiliar way the kit moved on my body when I made abrupt

movements or changes in direction. I remember that on that day of PT,

as a result of reflection on my experience with the new kit, that I should

try doing PT with my kit so I might become more familiar with it.

Subsequently, this has become my practice. PT has become about

learning to move with my kit, to have it feel like it is part of me, and not

just about physical fitness. I no loner think solely about speed, distance,

or repetitions when doing PT. I think about Soldiering. PT has become

training, training has become an objective, a Soldiers task, not just time

spent usefully preparing nor just waiting to do a Soldiers tasks. My kit

feels like it is part of me yet I have not lost my knowledge of what I cando slick. Strangely I notice, for example, that I am less likely to bend

over and check what is under a table when I am carrying a full load. I

wonder what this means. I wonder what it would have meant if I didnt

notice this.

The first vignette represents the most important theme in our discussions, that of flow

and transition in tactical thinking and action (thinking in action). These are deep

concepts that could not be more practical. At a high level, they refer to a kind of

momentum of individual and small unit actions that can survive the unpredictability of

the operating environment, from moment to moment, whether hostile or not. These

concepts are as much about biomechanics (e.g., physical constraints on action and

multiple physical solutions to a problem at hand) as about cognition (e.g, outwardorientation, adaptability) if not the practical overlap between these domains. The second

vignette illustrates a related area of overlap between cognition and biomechanics, ones

understanding of ones own capabilities. Whether implicit or explicit, and whether

veridical or not, this self-knowledge is critical to decisions made in the moment that can

have immediate life and death consequences. Of necessity, knowledge of ones own

capabilities and those of others also is invaluable in planning, and the consequences are

important even though they are delayed.


6/28


5

More generally, the details that emerged from these discussions resulted in a growing list

of human movement tasks that could be described in ways that would be recognizable

and understandable both to Soldiers and scientists (see section 3). They also enabled

another innovation, Quick Look events, that allowed us to share experiences more

directly than through words alone (see section 2, Figure 1).

Figure 1. Broader task analysis for biomechanics (see sections 2-3).

2 Collaborative Experience in Quick Look Events

Our collaborative reflection on micro-experiences both required and enabled a deeper

level of shared experience. The vignettes around which this reflection centered were in

many ways as detailed and connected as a script for a play or at least as the framework

for an improvisational play. We thus were able to create situations, much like rock drills

in the Army, in which we all could participate and share experiences on which we would

be able to reflect collaboratively. We were able do so concurrent with the experiences

and subsequent to them. We refer to these improvisational, shared experiences as Quick

Look events. Unique and essential attributes of Quick Looks are highlighted below:

Situated collaborative problem solving in which dialogue is grounded in aspects

of a situation that are collectively observable and verifiable and thus lessobfuscated by differences in jargon and unspecified assumptions. Shared

experience in a rich setting of relevant observables provides a plethora of

boundary objects that facilitate communication and connections among

disparate communities of practice (e.g., in the sense of Wenger, 1998). This is as

important in bridging the gap between different scientific disciplines as it is

between Soldiers and scientists (cf., Trochim, Marcus, Msse, et al., 2008).


7/28


6

While not necessary, outdoor settings are preferred for Quick Looks. The reason

for an outdoor setting often is confounded with the need for full immersion in an

environment that allows for mobility, multiple vantage points, and

omnidirectional perception (e.g., land navigation, aiming at multiple distances,

controlling inhabited or uninhabited vehicles, locating friend or foe), and in many

cases to provide realism that is difficult to simulate or represent (e.g., non-

Hookean dynamics of sand, mud, snow).

Shared situation awareness (SA) is the fundamental determinant of value, andthis is not limited to outdoor demonstrations even if it is considerably easier to

achieve outdoors for many tasks. Shared situation awareness, as opposed to

identical situation awareness, is useful to the extent that relatively small

differences in vantage point blend first-person and third-person perspectives.

This, in turn, fosters insightful collaborative reflection (e.g., Hamaoui, 2011).

Implicit in the value of shared SA is the opportunity for concurrent reciprocalinfluence among participations. The coupling between shared SA and reciprocal

influence gives participants "inescapable accountability" for the influence they

have on each other. They share their engagement with the world. They co-exist.

Sharing the experience of such connections, and the meaning it implies, enables a

deeper understanding of team dynamics. Quick Looks enable communication

from the second-person standpoint that otherwise is difficult without

contemporaneous shared experience (Riccio, Diedrich, & Cortez, 2010).

A value added, that generally is quite considerable, is that outdoor experiences

lend themselves to large-scale attendance and optional participation. Outdoor

demonstrations can allow attendees to move rather easily between passive

observation and active participation. Accordingly, they can be designed to foster

initiative, improvisation, and serendipity (Riccio, Diedrich, & Cortez, 2010).

We conducted two Quick Looks during the period of performance. One was at a site formilitary operations in urban terrain (MOUT) in an undisclosed location (Figure 2). The

other was on hiking trails at Mount Monadnock, NH (Figure 3). At the MOUT site, we

focused on the task of enter and clear a room and setting up a traffic control point

spread over a two-day period. At Mount Monadnock, over approximately eight hours, we

focused on land navigation during the approach phase of search and attack.

Our principal operational SME approached the Quick Looks as rehearsals such as rock

drills. In his approach to rehearsals, he periodically breaks the squad into teams to

generate discussion about their roles and responsibilities, to allow for initiative, and

sharing the meaning of the task and how it is approached. Normally, in these breakout

discussions during the rock drills, teams discuss operational issues and context. Our

adaptation is that we allow the scientists to use this as an opportunity to introduce theirrespective scientific perspectives on the activities and task at hand. When the operational

SME is not with a particular team introducing operational context, the team can take the

discussion in whatever direction they like.


8/28


7

Figure 2. Collaborative experience in Enter and Clear a Room for Quick Look #1.

Figure 3. Collaborative experience in land navigation during Quick Look #2.


9/28


8

In addition to collaborative reflection and extemporaneous discussion, the Quick Looks

included walk-throughs of events that normally occur very quickly (e.g., breach, clearing

a room) in addition to conducting the event at normal speed. Typical (moving) vantage

points of various members of a team were captured using video cameras. Video and still

photographs also were taken from third-person perspectives.

An important element of the Quick Looks was to appreciate 4d terrain. Four

dimensional (4d) terrain considers apertures (e.g., windows, doors, partial enclosures),

passageways (e.g., paths, hallways), obstacles (e.g., furniture, clutter, vegetation,

outcroppings), and barriers (e.g., walls, fortifications) as constraints on traversability that

alter the manner and speed with which a space can be traversed. 4d terrain brings timeinto the three cardinal dimensions of space but as an outcome rather than as a causal

variable. The layout of a building interior, for example, has a significant impact on

entering and clearing a room. In mountainous terrain, even with contour maps and

satellite imagery, it may be difficult or impossible to appreciate what one can see from a

particular place on the map.

In wooded terrain, it is difficult to appreciate what one can see through the clutter evenwith photographs from particular vantage points with the relevant seasonal foliage.

Inside the 4d terrain, motion parallax (e.g., head movements) and the three-dimensional

spatial vision it enhances helps overcome the intentional or natural camouflage of color,

size, and shape of optical texture in the surroundings. In all environments, the constraints

of natural surfaces and clutter on locomotion are difficult or impossible to appreciate

without actually experiencing them. Rehearsals in complex terrain foster thinking that is

more topological than geometric, and that is more dynamical than kinematic. These are

just a few examples of the operationally relevant considerations that we were able to

address in considerable scientific and operational detail as a result of our shared

experience in Quick Looks.

Situated collaborative problem solving in Quick Looks had a direct andpowerful influence on our literature review, recommendations, and weighting

of promising directions in the scientific support for design, evaluation, and

planning of Soldier load.

3 Behavioral-Experiental Ontology: A Periodic Table for Human Movement

Collaborative reflection on micro-experiences and sharing those experiences in Quick

Look events have been invaluable methods of collaboration within our diverse team and

with diverse stakeholders for R&D pertaining to Soldier load. They were not sufficient,

however, for a sustained scientific investigation in which systematic traceable progress

can be made. We needed a shared conceptual framework within which a diversity of

stakeholders could communicate effectively about expectations and outcomes of thetransdisciplinary program of research (Flyvberg, 2001; Msse, Moser, Stokols, et al.,

2008; Stokols, Fuqua, Gress, et al., 2003).

The science of transdisciplinary science emphasizes the important of concept maps and

logic models that aid communication among communities of practice with different

jargon and assumptions. They are a source of indicators (or near-term outcomes) with

respect to which progress in a systematic integrated program of research can be traced

over time (Quinlan, Kane, & Trochim, 2008, Trochim, Marcus, Msse, et al., 2008). The


10/28


9

development of concept maps typically begins with talking points, considerations, and

points of converging interest that can be communicated in a language that is

understandable by people from different disciplines. There can be hundreds of items in

such a shared ontology. Various psychometric methods then can be used to organize the

items into a map that one can use to understand the relationship of ones own community

of practice to another community of practice (e.g., different scientific disciplines).

Concept maps help one become a more informed consumer of information from anothercommunity or discipline.

The best concept maps promote discovery and innovation, that is, emergent

properties in the integration of different disciplines rather than mere

comparisons and analogies (Rosenfield, 1992).

Collaborative reflection and Quick Look events led to a list of human movement

concepts described in ways that would be recognizable and understandable both to

Soldiers and scientists from a variety of disciplines. For the most part, the concepts were

described in the language of everyday experience (Figure 4). In particular, the concepts

refer to observable behavior that is sufficiently familiar experientially to be associated

with common words or phrases. There were some exceptions where the concept could notbe expressed in any compact way in nonscientific and nonmilitary jargon (e.g.,

oculomotor dynamics, defilade posture). Such exceptions are less problematic due to the

structure of the concept map (i.e., our ontology for human movement) in which less

familiar terms generally are nested within broader categories that are more familiar.

A taxonomic numbering scheme is used for the ontology (i.j.k-l.m.n) for several reason:

(a) to facilitate navigation through any associated visualization or tabulation, (b) to reveal

gaps and shortfalls in the scientific community with respect to the needs of NSRDEC and

its stakeholders, (c) to facilitate mappings to the Performance Indicators, and (d) for

future use in computer programs. The characteristics of the numbering scheme are

described below.

The first set of three numbers (i.j.k) reflects a part of the map that can be organized as a

tree structure solely for the purpose of navigation. There currently are 63 behavioral-

experiential concepts classified by 21 "core processes" (i.j) and 5 high-level blocks (i) of

categories. Core processes (i.j) are a level of task specificity at which particular scientists

or particular laboratories tend to specialize. Figure 4 depicts the ontology as a periodic

table of behavioral-experiential elements that can be combined in various ways to

describe and assess more complex behavior. In this sense, while the concepts can be

visualized as a tree structure, their use is not limited to the assumptions of a strict tree

structure. Complex behavior involves concurrent and sequential nesting of elements in

this periodic table. Behavior within blocks 1 and 3 (and between these blocks) typically

are nested sequentially, and they can be assessed as such. Behavior in blocks 2, 4, and 5

typically is concurrently nested with behavior in Blocks 1 or 3, and they can be assessedas such.

While nesting has esoteric (epistemological and ontological) significance in the

scientific community, it is a practical exigency for science that is relevant to

Soldiers. It is a reason for science that is relevant to Soldiers.


11/28


10

Figure 4. Experiential-behavioral categories (i.j.k) organized into blocks (i).Numbers to the left of each category are ratings on a seven-point scale (1=highest).Higher ratings indicate operational relevance together with opportunity for scientificprogress.

Numbers after the dash (l.m.n) denote particular lab tasks classified hierarchically into

groups (Figure 5). Group lis a level of classification for lab paradigms that generalizes

across many core processes (i.j.k). This group generally refers to constraints on action

that, collectively, provide a roadmap for continual development in a science of load

planning. Group mis a basic level of classification for which different paradigms or

laboratory tasks address a common construct. Group nis the level of classification that

corresponds to a particular laboratory task (e.g., particular citations). There is a dash

between i.j.k and l.m.nbecause, in principle, the latter generally can be applied to any of

the categories of the former (although in the present work, this elaboration has been

worked out only for running and walking). This relatively mundane nuance of the

numbering scheme can be a source of considerable transdisciplinary innovation in

operationally-relevant human movement science.

The two-part ontology (e.g., represented in Figure 5) juxtaposes a practical framework of

concepts expressed in everyday language with a more esoteric framework that reveals

linkages to powerful scientific paradigms. Group l, for example, generally refers to


12/28


11

organismic constraints (l=1, 2), environmental constraints (l=3), and task constraints (l=4,

5). The delineation of these classes of constraints on action has been a powerful source of

transdisciplinary integration in academe (Newell, 1986) and in federally-funded R&D

(Riccio, 1993/1997). Karl Newells leadership in the academic amalgam of Kinesiology

is noteworthy in this regard. He has explicated the challenges and some solutions for

transdisciplinary integration in kinesiology given that there are over one hundred

different combinations of disciplines across the various academic departments that arerepresented by or at least associated with this community of practice and scholarship (see

e.g., Newell, 2007). The relevant disciplines include physics, biology, psychology,

sociology, and the humanities. The value of any organizing framework for such an

amalgam is that it helps reveal and promulgate reciprocal impact and innovation between

different disciplines. This is the intent of our behavioral-experiential ontology and theassociated periodic table.

In an academic department of kinesiology, the term biomechanics typically has a fairly

narrow connotation to distinguish scholars with more of an interest in physics from those

who bring other powerful constructs to the study of human movement. At NSRDEC,

there is no need for such internal differentiation. Of necessity, a more integrated

organization is required to transition science to the organizations that need guidance inequipping Soldiers for enhanced mobility, lethality, and survivability. The number and

variety of scholars associated with the term biomechanics at NSRDEC is closer to the

breadth of a department of kinesiology at a major university than to a narrower

connotation limited to the physics of human movement. In the context of the present

project, the desired integration with cognitive science underscores the connection with

the history and sociology of kinesiology as a discipline of disciplines. We thus have been

using the term biomechanics in a very broad sense in our work for NSRDEC.

Our broad view of the science relevant to biomechanics has had very practical and

comprehensive implications for our work. For example, the scientific disciplines

represented in the ontology are numerous, and the organizational affiliations of authors

on the associated citations in the biomechanics library explicitly reveal this breadth(section 4, Appendix). They include but are not limited to mechanical engineering (e.g.,

boundary conditions for systems that support conveyance and transportation), electrical

and computer engineering (e.g., robotics), aerospace engineering (e.g., adaptive control

systems), industrial engineering (e.g., occupational biomechanics and ergonomics,

manual control), bioengineering (e.g., physiological control systems, prosthetics,

orthotics), human movement science (e.g., biomechanics of posture and locomotion,

motor control, motor behavior, exercise and sport physiology, exercise and sport

psychology, exercise and sport sociology), psychology (e.g., perception and

psychophysics, psychophysiology, learning and development), health science (e.g.,

physical therapy, occupational therapy), neurology (e.g., neuropathology, neurometrics),

biology (e.g., comparative biomechanics, anatomy, physiology).

The ontology (e.g., as represented in part in Figure 5) shows how paradigmatic concepts

from one discipline can be applied to another. The particular citations in the

biomechanics library (Appendix) make these connections concrete but, in most cases, the

connections might be overlooked without the ontology. The ontology thus helps outsiders

become informed consumers of knowledge from an unfamiliar discipline of scholarship.

Moreover, it helps insiders look at their own discipline through a different lens. In both

ways, this approach to transdisciplinary integration fosters innovation (Riccio,

1993/1997).


13/28


12

Figure 5. Behavioral-experiential categories (i.j.k) differentiated intogroups (l.m). Numbers to the left of each category are ratings on a seven-point scale (1=highest). Higher ratings indicate operational relevancetogether with opportunity for scientific progress.

4 Biomechanics Library

To date, 103 categories of behavior have been identified as relevant to our discussions

and collaborative reflection about micro-experiences (Appendix). All these categories

were rated (weighted) by the investigator responsible for the biomechanics analysis

described above. Ratings were based on operational relevance and opportunity forscientific impact. Each category was rated on a seven-point scale in which the highest

rating reflected a high degree of relevance and opportunity. Relevance was based on

discussions pertaining to the operational tasks, 72-hour scenario, and development of

performance indicators as a whole (i.e., as opposed to specific PI). Soldier load

influenced the ratings of relevance given that it was a central theme throughout the CTA

and the concurrent discussions of micro-experiences. Opportunity was based on the

feasibility of research that would advance theory or evidence beyond the current body of

relevant scientific literature. The lowest rating reflected low relevance and opportunity. It


14/28


13

should be noted, however, that this designation of lowest is relative. By their very

inclusion in the ontology, all categories of behavior are noteworthy because they emerged

in our reflection on Soldiers micro-experiences.

A middle rating indicated high on one dimension and low on the other. Thus, a middle

rating could indicate relevant research where there is little opportunity either because of a

barrier to conducting the research or because a substantial body of relevant scientificliterature already exists. Alternatively, a middle rating could reflect an opportunity for

novel research that isnt especially relevant. Brief narrative summaries (descriptions)

are provided for the relevance and opportunity of all 103 categories in the library.

Two or three citations to the relevant scientific literature are provided for over 60 of the103 categories of behavior. All the categories rated 1 and 2, and almost all of the

categories rated 3, have citations associated with them. Some of the lower rated

categories also have citations associated with them; typically this is the case for

categories that potentially could have much greater relevance and opportunity if

combined in innovative ways with other categories. To date, citations are provided only

for complete documents that are publicly available on the web (generally linked through

Google Scholar). Citations are intended to stimulate innovation and to be somewhatrepresentative but not comprehensive. They are biased toward recent, replicable, peer-

reviewed research but with some important exceptions. Citations are provided for early or

classic works in which key assumptions are most likely to be explained or justified. They

also are provided for peer-reviewed research that potentially is more valuable to

NSRDEC than to the broader academic community. Citations occasionally are provided

for research having had minimal peer review if it has compelling relevance to NSRDEC.

Figure 6. Library of measures used in relevant scientific domains.


15/28


14

Behavioral-experiential categories from the biomechanics analysis were mapped into

performance indicators (PI) even though these PI were the result of a cognitivetask

analysis (Figure 6). Because of the epistemological differences between cognitive science

and biomechanics highlighted in section 1, a large number of the 103 categories in the

biomechanics analysis are relevant to specific PI, and vice versa. At the same time, it is

not the case that everything is related to everything. The structure of the ontology for

biomechanics enabled us to identify a basic or middle level (i.j) that differentiatedusefully among different PI. For consistency with the cognitive mapping to PI, we refer

to this basic level as core processes. The links in the library enable one to go from PI to

behavioral-experiential categories in the biomechanics analysis or in the other direction.

The mapping is at a higher level of abstraction, of necessity, than for the cognitive tasks.

This higher level of abstraction has a qualitatively different kind of value.

Consider, for example, the PI develop a plan and the sub-PI determine route within

the context of the squad critical task of conduct reconnaissance for the planning phase

of search and attack within the 72-hour scenario. All the core processes within the

biomechanics group of move over, through, and around (i.e., 1.1 locomotion, 1.2

fording, 1.3 climbing, 1.4 jumping) potentially are relevant to this PI, and there are a

large number of laboratory tasks in biomechanics that are relevant to the PI and theassociated core processes for biomechanics. Yet, when one looks at one of the

behavioral-experiential categories (i.e., category of lab tasks), there is considerable utility

even for analyses that are not limited to biomechanics.

It would not be practical to pursue comprehensively a level of detail below the current set

of PI. Selecting a subset of PI for more detailed task analysis is the only alternative. The

behavioral-experiential detail provided by the biomechanical analysis is a good basis

from which to prioritize and do a more selective analysis because this detail includes

science that we know to be feasible and relevant. If, for example, one looks at the

particular category of lab task 1.1.1-3 of running through challenging terrain, there

can be highly detailed and productive collaboration between Soldiers and scientists that is

relevant to the squad critical task of conduct reconnaissance. The problem of conductreconnaissance becomes nonarbitrarily more specific because the additional specificity in

further analysis of the operational situation can be driven by knowledge of science that

can be brought to bear on the problems that subsequently would be identified in this more

specific discussion. This is what the library reveals to us. It is actionable and insightful

precisely because the mapping to PI is at a higher level of abstraction. It points the way to

more detailed analysis even on the operational side of the problem and in scientific

disciplines outside those addressed by the library.

The mere existence of the behavioral-experiential categories is a powerful

weighting and prioritization for further analysis. The explicit weightings of

these categories simply add to this value. The chance of an analytical dead end

thus is considerably reduced.

Consider the grounded dialogue that would be stimulated by subcategory 1.1.1-3-5

spatial constrained. What would one need to have reconnaissance about if running

through challenging terrain is an issue? What are the conditions under which that would

be likely to happen? Is there limited visibility because of wooded terrain and bends in the

road? Is the terrain sloped such that there are vantage points above the route of travel that

would reduce survivability? What can Soldiers see from the vantage point of their

intended route given wooded and mountainous terrain? Should Soldiers split into two


16/28


15

teams for more refined reconnaissance with near-term implications? Can autonomous

robots (e.g., SUGV, SUAV) effectively provide an alternative for such beyond-line-of-

sight reconnaissance? How closely packed are trees off the route, how thick is the

underbrush, and to what extent and with what difficulty is it traversable? How quickly

can Soldiers doff kit and what effect would this have on their mobility? How would

doffed kit influence the lethality of Soldiers? What is the impact on tactical

marksmanship if Soldiers need to jump or otherwise move abruptly to another locationand vantage point where a shoot/no-shoot decision will have to be made? All these topics

emerged in situated collaborative problem solving during our Quick Look on Mount

Monadnock. More importantly, the biomechanics library shows the productive scientific

directions one can take to address the implications of the questions above.

A different set of productive questions arises when considering different elements of the

biomechanics library such as the subcategories 1.1.1-3.2 compliant surfaces and 1.1.1-

3.3 slippery surfaces. What are the factors that influence these properties of the support

surface such as the relative amounts of sand, clay, rock, and moisture? To what extent

can multispectral sensing (e.g., sensor package on a robotic asset) provide reconnaissance

about the composition of the terrain? To what extent do the relative amounts of sand, clay,

rock, and moisture influence the stability, efficiency, and energy expenditure of running,and to what extent is this different for walking (as addressed in subcategories under 1.1.2-

3)? To what extent does this complement a load planning tool that provides information

on energy expenditure as a function of distance and changes in elevation over different

routes as well as branching points depending on the likelihood that a particular segment

of a route has been washed out or flooded? To what extent can this information be

integrated in decisions based on use of a load planning tool or integrated into such

decision aids for route planning? These are exceedingly relevant questions with potential

impact on capability development based on science that the library tells us is available.

Thus there would be a relatively high return on an investment in further analysis of the

route planning PI based on mapping to the behavioral-experiential categories in the

biomechanics library.

The mapping between PI and biomechanics at a high level of abstraction (i.e.,

basic level of core processes) leads to scientific detail that can be exploited in

more refined analysis of operational tasks that has a higher payoff than

otherwise would be possible.

5 Toward a Transdisciplinary Science of Soldier and Squad-Level Capabilities

There are a number of features to the library that are generative. The library goes beyond

description of the relevance of science to operations and vice versa to suggest priorities

and potential directions for innovation in both science and operations. The mapping of

core and secondary processes to performance indicators, for example, came to have some

interesting attributes. Typically there are multiple processes associated with a particularPI. As indicated above, this will be useful in directing further scientific discussion and

investigation of the squad-critical tasks and the 72-hour scenario. It provides a path to the

development of measures, based on the PI, which can provide actionable feedback to

guide continuous development of individual and squad-level capabilities.

In the context of measure development, the multiplicity of processes of relevance to

particular PI also introduces the concept of nesting. This nesting is generative insofar as it

suggests ways to integrate ostensibly incommensurate experimental paradigms to achieve


17/28


16

a balance of internal and external validity that is appropriate for evidence-based

development of Soldier systems. As an element of our framework for transdisciplinary

science, nesting is a raison dtre for research in Army Research, Development, and

Engineering Centers that is not likely to be done in the broader scientific community yet

that leverages that broader national resource.

Nesting helps bridge the gap between the broader scientific community and theresearch that only Army RDECs are likely to conduct.

Consider, for example, research into tactical marksmanship that is addressed in the

category of biomechanics lab task 3.4.2 aiming as opposed to competition

marksmanship or typical marksmanship training in the Army. One of the citations in thiscategory (Palmer, Riccio, & van Emmerik, 2012) is a laboratory experiment in which

landing (jumping from a height of 24 inches) was combined with postural stability

(maintenance of bipedal stance) and dynamic visual acuity (maintenance of gaze on a

point of regard). The study built on a solid foundation in various independent lines of

research. While the research was motivated by the needs of NSRDEC, it is not the kind of

research that typically would be conducted in academe.

With an eye toward the needs of NSRDEC, Palmers work reveals that exceedingly

practical issues can be addressed with scientific rigor and in an academic laboratory with

the influence of NSRDEC. Practical questions go beyond how much shock is transmitted

to various parts of the body as perturbations (i.e., unintended motion and altered

mobility) and for how long after landing. They address whether the amplitude,

distribution, and duration of perturbations has consequences for tasks that must be

performed by a Soldier, such as aiming a rifle and making a shoot/no-shoot decision.

Time scales and error have meaning in such this kind of research; they are not arbitrary.

Inability to think and act in a specific time frame with a specific level of performance has

lethal consequences (for oneself or someone else). The mobility involved in postural

transitions and support of perception and nested action systems has consequences for

lethality and survivability. They are thoroughly intertwined as any experienced Soldierknows. Moreover, the nesting of tasks in Palmers work provided new insight into the

consequences of Soldier load. In particular, asymmetry of load emerged as the most

important factor influencing performance even in elite shooters. More generally, the

reason for trandisciplinary research is to facilitate transition of science to technical,

operational, or programmatic solutions and this often has simultaneous implications for

materiel development and training (McDonald, Riccio, & Newman, 1999).

Nesting of tasks enables one to transform expedient measures of performance in one

domain or another and combine them in ways that reveal tangible outcomes. For example,

a frequency spectrum of vibration transmitted from foot to the head, combined with a

frequency spectrum of compensatory capabilities of the head-neck system or the

oculomotor system, combined with contrast reduction as a function of the frequencyspectrum of retinal slip, combined visual detection time as a function of contrast

reduction, combined the time it takes to decide to shoot or not shoot provides indications

about operational effectiveness that are concrete if not binary (life or death) but also may

have strategic implications. This is an example of what it means to analyze the Soldier as

a system (cf., Riccio, McDonald, & Bloomberg, 1999).


18/28


17

Often the esoteric units of measurement utilized in analyzing components of a

system either cancel out or combine in some way that is much simpler than the

component parts. This is common in engineering and often the point of it.

In the biomechanics section of the library as in the cognitive science section, core and

secondary processes differentiate behavioral-experiential categories that are more

relevant or more directly relevant to a particular PI from those that are less so. Secondaryprocesses are not unimportant or irrelevant; they are just less so than core processes. A

behavioral-experiential category (e.g., 4.3 affordances/effectivities) that is a secondary

process for one PI (e.g., develop a plan for search and attack) can be a core process for

another PI (e.g., dynamic replanning of load in establishing a traffic control point).

In the biomechanics library, it generally is the case the core and secondary processes are

nested either concurrently or sequentially. This fact is utilized in the section of the library

on biomechanical measures to draw attention to highly relevant transdisciplinary

connections. To simplify this implication in this section of the library, the rows always

specify only one core process and one associated secondary process. Typically this

association is explicitly addressed in the research that is cited in the same row. There are

many more opportunities for transdisciplinary research into the nesting of differentbehavioral-experiential categories in every row of the library. These opportunities for

paradigmatic innovation are highlighted in the cross-references column for each

behavioral-experiential category and to some extent in the descriptions for each

category. Future innovations that realize this potential would be accommodated in the

library as additional rows with classification in terms of i.j.k-l.m.n. Similarly the library

can accommodate additional rows for particular laboratory tasks that are extant and

represented in the citations already in the library (e.g., at the level of i.j.k-l.m). In either

case, tasks at the level of ncould be given a name (e.g., the Palmer task for tactical

marksmanship). Tasks (rows) at higher levels in the biomechanics library dont require a

name because they generally are not tasks created for scientific purposes and unique to

science. They are common tasks that Soldiers and others perform on the job or in daily

life, thus, the common words for those tasks or activities are used.

The library has been designed for extensibility so it can both stimulate and accommodate

future innovation in science for Soldiers. In the biomechanics library, we explored use of

several additional columns to suggest modifications of existing research and to do so in

some systematic way that could be applied iteratively to any task (row) in the library. The

thinking behind these exploratory columns and the extensibility they promote is

highlighted below:

"Workload/Effort/Endurance" refers to cognitive and physiological limits onperformance in complex or time-consuming tasks

"Stability" refers to the ability to maintain or persist in some set of states or

configurations "Equilibrium" refers to a preferred set of states or configurations (i.e., an

objective)

"Flow" refers to something that persists over changes in other aspects of a

situation

"Transition" refers to essential (purposeful) change as opposed to incidental

change (e.g., perturbations)


19/28


18

Nesting refers to transformation in an ontological category (i.e., nesting

changes the fundamental unit of analysis)

Epistemological refers to transformation in an epistemological category with

invariance in ontological category (e.g., use of kinetics measures instead ofkinematics measures)

Scale refers to transformation of scale with invariance in the epistemologicalcategory (e.g., time scale or spatial scale)

Parameterization refers to transformation in the structure of the parameter set

used for measurement with invariance in the epistemological category (e.g., 3d

instead of 2d, depth instead of breadth)

Team refers to task changes that can address team behavior or processes

instead of or in addition to the behavior of individuals

Transdisciplinary implications refers to the relevance and potential impact of

research at NSRDEC on other Army laboratories and disciplines

Materiel implications and constraints refers to the relevance and potentialimpact of research at NSRDEC on Army acquisitions programs of record

Nonmateriel implications and constraints refers to the relevance and potential

impact of research at NSRDEC on Army training and education

As an example of how these dimensions of extensibility can be utilized, entries in all

these columns are provided for the following behavioral-experiential categories:

1.1.1-1.2 Elastic storage (Running)

1.1.1-2.3 Cutting (Running)

1.1.1-3.5 Spatially constrained (Running)

3.4.2 Aiming

4.4.2 Kinematics-constrained reasoning

5.2.3 Use of Sensory Accessories

We believe these dimensions of extensibility will provide useful guidance in discoveringopportunities for paradigmatic innovation in the juxtaposition of cognitive and

biomechanics laboratory tasks because of their parallel mapping to PI (Figure 6). This

parallel mapping should be viewed from the perspective of integration and reciprocal

influence (i.e., transdisciplinary science) as opposed to analogy or coincidence of interest

(Rosenfield, 1992; Stokols et al., 2003). For example, the periodic table of behavioral-

experiential elements can be a source of guidance for general experimental conditions

that reveal or promote transition. It also can be a source of independent variables or

covariates in experiments in the social and cognitive sciences. The relevance of

laboratory research in the social and cognitive sciences thus can become more salient and,

in any case, better defined with respect to this periodic table of elements that are

observable either behaviorally, experientially, or both.

Finally, an initial conclusion from our work is that embodied cognitioncan be a fruitful

area of transdisciplinary research at NSRDEC (e.g., Anderson, 2003; Wilson, 2002).

Embodied cognition is in a separate block of the behavioral-experimental periodic table

(4. Nested Perception or Cognition). It should be noted that this and other behavioral-

experiential elements in this block often are designated as secondary processes in the

library and only rarely as core processes. This is because, in principle, embodied

cognition can be coupled with every other element in the periodic table. It reflects the

simple fact that Soldiers are thinking beings, and they always have been even before the


20/28


19

21stcentury Soldier competencies became a high priority. What Soldiers know or believe

about themselves and their teammates influences what they do and what they plan to do.

As indicated above (section 1), self-knowledge is critical to decisions made in the

moment that can have immediate life and death consequences. Knowledge of ones own

capabilities and those of others is invaluable in planning, and the consequences are

important even though they are delayed.

In particular, there seem to be many useful connections between the research in embodied

cognition and the design and use of a load-planning tool (LPT). We believe they can

inform each other. The data and models utilized in an LPT are a small subset of the

constraints on locomotion, not to mention human movement in general, that are

addressed in the research cited in the biomechanics library. The lists of PI for Squad-critical tasks and the 72-hour scenario indicate the relevance of the biomechanics

research and what Soldiers would do with such information about constraints on action.

The cognitive library essentially indicates the cognitive processes that Soldiers can bring

to bear on the acquisition and use of information about constraints on action in the

context of particular PI. A deeper understanding of these transdisciplinary connections

could lead to a leap ahead in the sophistication of an LPT and its use. Even if some

connections were not exploited in an LPT, they almost certainly would have relevance totraining.

The transdisciplinary library, and the mapping between Squad-level tasks and

scientific paradigms, represents knowledge that highly experienced Soldiers

should have when they have mastered their craft. Formative measures that

help assess and improve this knowledge should be a priority. In other words,

training and education must be integrated and developed with capabilities

provided by technology.

References

Anderson, M.L. (2003). Field Review Embodied Cognition: A field guide.ArtificialIntelligence, 149, 91130.

Aptima (2012, July). Report to the U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development and

Engineering Center. Woburn, MA: Aptima, Inc.

Flyvberg, B. (2001).Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it

can

succeed again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.

Hamaoui, J. (2011, January). Colab: A model for accelerated solutions. Paper presented

at the NHHPC Workshop on Collaborative Innovation: Strategies and Best Practices.

Houston, TX: NASA Human Health and Performance Center.http://www.nasa.gov/offices/NHHPC/media/201101-NHHPC-Workshop-Hamaoui.html

Msse, L. C., Moser, R. P., Stokols, D., Taylor, B. K., Marcus, S. E., Morgan, G. D., Hall,

K.L., Croyle, R.T., Trochim, W. (2008). Measuring Collaboration and Transdisciplinary

Integration in Team Science.American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(2,

Supplement 1), S151-S160.


21/28


20

McDonald, P.V., Riccio, G.E., & Newman, D. (1999). Understanding skill in EVA mass

handling: Part IV: An integrated methodology for evaluating space suit mobility and

stability.NASA Technical Paper 3684. Lyndon B.Johnson Space Center, Houston TX.

Newell, K. (2007). Kinesiology: challenges of multiple agendas. Quest, 59, 5-24.

Palmer, C.J., Riccio, G.E., & van Emmerik, R.E.A. (2012). Orienting under load:Intrinsic dynamics and postural affordances for visual perception.Ecological Psychology,

24(2), 95-121.

Quinlan, K. M., Kane, M., & Trochim, W. M. K. (2008). Evaluation of large research

initiatives: Outcomes, challenges, and methodological considerations. In C. L. S. Coryn& M. Scriven (Eds.),Reforming the evaluation of research: New directions for

evaluation, 118, 6172.

Riccio, G. (1993/1997).Multimodal perception and multicriterion control of nested

systems: Self motion in real and virtual environments. (UIUC-BIHPP-93-02).

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: Beckman Institute for Advanced Science &

Technology (Part I reprinted in Riccio & McDonald, 1997, NASA Technical Paper series3703).

Riccio, G., Diedrich, F., & Cortes, M. (Eds.).An Initiative in Outcomes-Based Training

and Education: Implications for an Integrated Approach to Values-Based Requirements

(Chapter 3). Fort Meade, MD: U.S. Army Asymmetric Warfare Group.

Riccio, G., & McDonald, P. & Bloomberg, J. (1999).Multimodal perception and

multicriterion control of nested systems: III. A functional visual assessment test for

human health maintenance and countermeasures, NASA/TP-1999-3703c, Johnson Space

Center, Houston, TX.

Rosenfield, P. L. (1992). The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining andextending linkages between the health and social sciences. Social Science and Medicine,

35, 13431357.

Stokols, D., Fuqua, J., Gress, J., Harvey, R., Phillips, K., Baezconde-Garbanati, L., et al.

(2003). Evaluating transdisciplinary science.Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 5, S-1,

S21S39.

Trochim. W., Marcus, S.E., Msse, L.C., Moser, R.P., Weld, P. (2008). The evaluation of

large research initiatives: A participatory integrative mixed-methods approach,American

Journal of Evaluation, 29, 1, 8-28.

Wenger, Etienne (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,

9(4), 625-636.


22/28

Core BiomechanicalProcesses

Secondary BiomechanicalProcesses

Specific Component ofConstruct Measured

Detailed Description (Lab Task and Materials)Citation (Containing Task Explanation)

1. Move over, through, around

1.1 Locomotion

1.1-1 Movement in General Individual MovementTechniques and SpecificMilitary Maneuvers

Operationally, the section in HQDA (2008) on "Individual Movement Techniques"is most relevant to identification of critical biomechanical issues. With rapiddevelopments in instrumentation, obstacle courses are potentially a viable,reliable, and replicable test bed for "research in the wild."

Technically, if we are to take "Soldier as a System" seriously and specifically interms of a dynamical system, it behooves us to consider and adapt the broadestrange of mature transdisciplinary research on human perception and control ofdynamical systems (e.g., Riccio, 1993/1997). The implications of such researchfor systems design and training will be a rich source of innovation that canaccommodate quantitative and qualitative verification and validation ofassessment methods as well as materiel and nonmateriel capabilities [e.g.,1.1.1-2 Natural Variations].

HQDA (2008). Movement. In: FM 3-21.75: The Warrior Ethos and Soldier Combat Skills (Chapter 7). Washington DC:HQDA.

Frykman, P.N., Harman, E.A., & Pandorf, C.E. (2000). Correlates of obstacle course performance among female soldiers

carrying two different loads. DTIC ADP010994. Natick, MA: U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine.

LaFiandra, M., Lynch, S., Frykman, P., Everett Harman, E., Ramos, H., & Mello, R. (2003). A comparison of twocommercial off the shelf backpacks to the Modular Lightweight Load Carrying Equipment (MOLLE) in biomechanics,metabolic cost and performance. T03-15. Natick, MA: U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine.

Riccio, G. (1993/1997). Multimodal perception and multicriterion control of nested systems: Self motion in real andvirtual environments. (UIUC-BIHPP-93-02). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: Beckman Institute forAdvanced Science & Technology (reprinted in Riccio & McDonald, 1997, NASA Technical Paper series 3703).

1.1-2 Support SurfaceDynamics

4.3.1 PerceiveObjects/Surroundings

Rheology and Terramechanics Perception and control of movement cannot be understood, in principle, withoutconsidering interaction between the moving system and the substrate on whichit moves. Classic references are:* Scott Blair, G.W. (1944). A survey of general and applied rheology. New York:Pitman.* Bekker, M.G. (1956). Theory of land locomotion: The mechanics of vehiclemobility. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.* Muro, T., & O'Brien, J. (1984). Terramechanics: Land locomotion mechanics.Lisse, NL: Swets & Zeitlinger.* Nigg, B.M. (1986). Biomechanics of running shoes. Champaign, IL: HumanKinetics.

Stoffregen, T.A., & Riccio, G.E. (1988). An ecological theory of orientation and the vestibular system. PsychologicalReview, 95(1), 3-14.

Ding, Y., Gravis, N., Li, C., Maladen, R.D., Mazouchova, N., Sharpe, S.S., Umbahnowar, P.B., & Goldman, D.I. (2012).Comparative studies reveal principles of movement on and within granular media. In: S. Childress, Hosoi, A., Schults,W.W., & Wang, Z. (Eds.) !Natural Locomotion in Fluids and on Surfaces: Swimming, Flying, and Sliding"(Volume 155 ofthe IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications). Springer.

1.1.1 Running

1.1.1-1 General Properties 1.1.2 Walking Running typically is assessed in the laboratory using constant velocity treadmilllocomotion. Overground locomotion requires different kinds of instrumentationand analyses, and these methodological capabilities are undergoing rapidscientific and technical innovation. "Fighting load" is more relevant than"approach load" [1.1-1 Movement in General] to assessment of "running" inSoldiers, although approach loads may lead to utilization of elastic-kineticenergy exchanges characteristic of running at lower speeds and without a flightphase [1.1.1-1.2 Elastic Storage].

1.1.1-1.1 Transmissibility 2.4.1 Self-Generated ReactiveForce

Energy exchange Shock absorption is an important aspect of whole-body dynamics (e.g.,musculoskeletal system and soft tissue) for a variety of reasons including injuryand fatigue, energy exchange, and stability of the platform for the visual

system (i.e., the head).

Vorbitsky, O., Mizrahi, J., Voloshin, A., Treiger, J., & Eli lsakov, E. (1998). Shock Transmission and Fatiguein Human Running. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 14, 300-311.

Challis, J.H. & Pain, M.T.G. (2008). Soft tissue motion influences skeletal loads during impacts. Exercise and SportSciences Reviews, 36, 71-75

1.1.1-1.2 Elastic storage 2.4.1 Self-Generated ReactiveForce

Energy exchange The best distinction between walking and running is elastic vs. gravitationalpotential energy exchanges with kinetic energy of (generally forward) motion.Comparative biomechanics reveals that a flight phase is an incidental feature ofgaits utilizing elastic energy storage. Together with computer modeling,comparative biomechanics shows that altered morphology and body dynamicscan lead to a wider variety of stable gait patterns than just walking andrunning.

Cavagna, G.A., & Kaneko (1977). Mechanical work and energy in level walking and running. Journal of Physiology, 268,467-481.

Biknevicius, A. R., & Reilly, S.M. (2006). Correlation of symmetrical gaits and whole body mechanics: Debunking mythsin locomotor biodynamics. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 305A, 923-934.

Srinivasan, M. & Andy Ruina, A. (2006). Computer optimization of a minimal biped model discovers walking andrunning. Nature, 439(5), 72-75.

1.1.1-1.3 PulmonaryVentilation

5.1.2 Coordinated Breathing Coordination Coordination between the overlapping musculoskeletal systems involved inrespiration and locomotion is a skill, however mundane, that can improve withtargeted training especially in unusual conditions. This is an everyday skill thattakes on relatively greater importance when expansion of the thoracic cavity isconstrained.

McDermott, W.J., Van Emmerik, R.E.A. Hamill, J. (2003). Running training and adaptive strategies of locomotor-respiratory coordination. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 89, 435-444.

Bernasconi, P. & Kohl, J. (1993). Analysis of co-ordination between breathing and exercise rhythms in man. Journal ofPhysiology, 471, 693-706.

1. 1.1- 1. 4 Sp rin t/R us h 2. 4.1 En er gy Ab sor pti on S peed In hig h-s pe ed tr avel un der load , a key co nsi der ati on is th e fo rces on th emusculoskeletal system upon footfall. Physical fitness enables higher-speedlocomotion (rush). It is an empirical question whether fitness, and what kind,leads to more effective (coordinated) energy absorption and transfer.

Blount, E.M., Tolk, A., & Ringleb, S.I. (2010, April). Physical Fitness for Tactical Success. Paper presented at the VMASCStudent Capstone Conference; Virginia Modeling, Analysis and Simulation Center, Old Dominion University, Suffolk, VA.

Chumanov, E.S., Heiderscheit, B.C., & Thelen, D.G. (2011). Hamstring musculotendon dynamics during stance andswing phases of high speed running. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 43(3), 525532.

1 .1 .1 -1 .5 Endura nc e 1 .1 .2 -1 .5 Endura nc e Ene rgy e xc ha nge Injury bi om ec ha ni cs is an im po rt an t s ourc e o f i nf orma ti on pe rt ai ni ng toendurance. Comparative biomechanics also can be insightful to the extent thatexcessive weight and bulk essentially turns the human into a different speciesbiomechanically.

Hoskins, W. (2012). Low back pain and injury in athletes. In: Y. Sakai (Ed.), Low back pain pathogenesis and treatment(pp. 41-68). Rijeka, Croatia: InTech.

Bramble, D.M. & Lieberman, D.E (2004). Endurance running and the evolution of Homo. Nature, 432(18), 345-352.

1.1.1-1.6 Spatiotemporalrange

4.3.1 Perceive Surroundings Traversability Research on orienteering, obstacle courses, and combined athletic events are agood source for guidance on how to conceptualize and measure this capability.

Mullins, N. (2012). Obstacle course challenges: History, popularity, performance demands, effective training, andcourse design. Journal of Exercise Physiology, 15(2), 100-128.

Alonso, J.-M., Edouard, P., Fischetto, G., Adams, B., Depiesse, F., & Mountjoy, M. (2012). Determination of future

prevention strategies in elite track and field: analysis of Daegu 2011 IAAF Championships injuries and illnessessurveillance. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 46, 505514.

1.1.1-2 Natural Variations 1.1-2 Support SurfaceDynamics

Consider developing a methodology analogous to the Cooper-Harper ratingscale that is used to assess the "handling qualities" of vehicles. Assess handlingqualities for a particular behavioral-experiential category ("biomechanicalprocess) at least at the three-number level [e.g., 1.1.1 running vice 1.1.2walking] under a small set of well-specified conditions and maneuvers that canbe characterized and verified quantitatively [e.g., 1.1-1 Movement in General].This would allow for specification of a performance envelope for eachbiomechanical process.

Cooper, G.E., & Harper, R.P. (1969). The use of pilot rating in the evaluation of aircraft handling qualities. AGARD-NATOReport 567. Neuilly-sur-Seine Cedex, France: Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development.

Research and Technology Organisation North Atlantic Treaty Organization (2002). Collaboration for land, air, sea, andspace vehicles: Developing the common ground in vehicle dynamics, system identification, control, and handlingqualities. France: Research and Technology Organization North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

1. 1.1- 2. 1 Acc eler ati on 1. 1.2 Wal kin g A ccel era tio n Th e mo st imp or ta nt co nsid er ati on s for ch an ges in sp eed ar e ga it tr an sit io nsbetween running and walking because they are intimately linked to energyexpenditure, stability, and effectivities (e.g., terrain that can be traversed withone gait pattern or another).

Segers, V, Lenoir, M., Aerts P., De Clercq, D. (2007). Influence of M. tibialis anterior fatigue on the walk-to-run and run-to-walk transition in non-steady state locomotion, Gait Posture, 25(4), 639-647.

Sasaki, K. & Neptune, R.R. (2006). Muscle mechanical work and elastic energy utilization during walking and runningnear the preferred gait transition speed. Gait & Posture, 23, 383390.

1 .1 .1 -2 .2 Brak ing (s to pp ing) 2 .2 .1 Upr ight S ta nc e B ra ki ng B eyond the cr it ic al i ss ue s pe rt ai ni ng t o rheo lo gi ca l c ha ra ct er is ti cs o f the fo ot -ground interface, that also are common in turning, the most important issues inbraking pertain to perception and control of time to contact with an object ormilestone in the surroundings and establishing stable postural control for thenext activity in the sequence.

Lee, D.N. (1980). The optical flow field: The foundation of vision. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society ofLondon B, 290 (1038), 169-178.

Fajen, B.R. (2005). Calibration, information, and control strategies for braking to avoid a collision. Journal ofExperimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(3), 480501.

1.1.1-2.3 Cutting 2.2.2 Leaning Cutting Because of technological limitations of the laboratory, historically, almost allstudies of human locomotion have involved motion in a straight line. Changes indirection are ubiquitous, however, in natural environments and the activities ofdaily living as well as in occupational and recreational activities. Changes indirection reveal the sophisticated control required to coordinate balance withpropulsion, the critical importance of foot morphology and shoe design, and therequirement to consider support-surface characteristics in an externally validanalysis of locomotion.

Kuntze, G., Sellers, W.I, & Mansfield, N.J. (2009). Bilateral ground reaction forces and joint moments for lateralsidestepping and crossover stepping tasks. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 8, 1-8.

Wannop, J.W., Worobets, J.T. and Stefanyshyn, D.J. (2010) Footwear traction and lower extremity joint loading.American Journal of Sport Medicine, Vol. 38(6), 1221-1228.


1.1.1-3 Challenging Terrain

1.1.1-3.1 Inclined/Declinedsurfaces

4 .1 .2 Feet (Hapt ics) Traversabil ity Uphil l locomot ion i s qua li ta tive ly di fferent f rom locomot ion on level groundbecause a significant percentage of gravitational potential energy (e.g., in loadcarried) is not returned for immediate use as translational kinetic energy.Gravitational potential cannot be utilized extensively during downhill locomotionbecause of limits on eccentric muscle loading, elastic energy storage, andviscoelastic dissipation of energy.

Gottschall, J.S., & Kram, R. (2005).Ground reaction forces during downhill and uphill running. Journal of Biomechanics,38, 445452.

Mizrahi, J., Verbitsky, O., & Isakov, E. (2001). Fatigue-induced changes in decline running. Clinical Biomechanics, 16,207-212.

1 .1 .1-3 .2 Compliant surfaces 4 .1 .2 Feet (Haptics) Traversabil ity Consider the body-surface system as a fundamenta l uni t o f ana lysis. Analyzebody and surface in commensurable terms enabling relational constructs suchas impedance matching.

Ferris, D.P., Louie, M., & Farley, C.T. (1998). Running in the real world: adjusting leg stiffness for different surfaces.Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 265, 989-994.

McMahon, T.A. & Greene, P.R. (1979). The influence of track compliance on running. Journal of Biomechanics, 12, pp.893-904.

1 .1 .1-3 .3 Sl ippery surfaces 4 .1 .2 Feet (Haptics) Traversabil ity The phys ical sc iences associated wi th so il mechanics (e.g. rheo logy, t ribo logy)are a valuable partner in the study of locomotion outside the laboratory.Robotics also can provide a valuable test bed for modeling and analysis ofconstraints and characteristics of locomotion on surfaces outside the laboratory.

Guisasola, I., James, L., Llewellyn, C., Bartlett, M., Stiles, V., & Dixon S. (2009). Human-surface interactions: anintegrated study. International Turfgrass Society Research Journal, 11, 1097-1106.

Qian, F., Zhang, T., Li, C., et al. (2012, July). Walking and running on yielding and fluidizing ground. Paper presented at2012 Robotics: Systems and Science. University of Sydney, Sydney NSW Australia. Retrieved fromhttp://www.roboticsproceedings.org/rss08/index.html

Appendix. Biomechanics Library

A-1


23/28

1.1 .1-3 .4 Uneven surfaces 4 .1 .2 Feet (Haptics) Traversabil ity For la rge discont inui ties that require s tr id ing, there may be ins ights f rom theextensive body of research on end-point control although there are importantnuances in the requirements for controlling the direction of the thrust vectorupon contact. For small discontinuities, stability of the ankle joint will berelatively important and haptic sensitivity will be important on correspondinglyshorter time scales.

Daley, M.A., & Usherwood, J.R. (2010). Two explanations for the compliant running paradox: reduced work of bouncingviscera and increased stability in uneven terrain. Biological Letters, 6, 418-421.

van der Krogt, M.A., de Graaf, W.W., Farley, C.T., Moritz, C.T., Casius, L.J.R., & and Maarten F. Bobbert, M.F. (2009).Robust passive dynamics of the musculoskeletal system compensate for unexpected surface changes during humanhopping. Journal of Applied Physiology, 107, 801808.

. . . . . .1.1.1-3.5 Spatiallyconstrained

1.1.1-4.2 Torso perturbations Traversability "Four dimensional" (4d) terrain considers apertures (e.g., windows, doors,partial enclosures), passageways (e.g., paths, hallways), obstacles (e.g.,furniture, clutter, vegetation, outcroppings), and barriers (e.g., walls,fortifications) as constraints on traversability that alter the manner and speedwith which a space can be traversed. 4d terrain brings time into the threecardinal dimensions of space but as an outcome rather than as a causal variable(e.g., as is typically the case in physics). The layout of a building interior, forexample, has a significant impact on entering and clearing a room. There is adearth of research in this area but a growing body of related research on semi-autonomous robots, teleoperation, games, as well as human navigation andspatial perception.

Roy, T.C., Springer, B.A., McNulty, V., Butler, N.L. (2010). Physical fitness. Military Medicine, 175(8), 14-96.

Maguire, E.A., Neil Burgess, N., James G. Donnett, J.G., Frackowiak, R.S.J., Frith, C.D., OKeefe, J. (1998). Knowingwhere and getting there: A human navigation network. Science, 280, 921-924.

Takayama, L., Marder-Eppstein, E., Harri s, H., & Beer, J. M. (2011). Assisted driving of a mobile remote presencesystem: System design and controlled user evaluation. Proceedings of International Conference on Robotics andAutomation. 1883-1889.

1.1.1-4 DisturbanceRegulation

4. 3.2 Pe rceiv e Self S tab il ity An ex ten siv e b od y of wo rk on hu ma n con tr ol of ph ysi cal sy stems can pr ov ide asource of innovation and insight in the study of human control of pedallocomotion. The relatively rapidly increasing body of literature on nonlinear

control should be considered as well as work in linear and quasi-linear control.

Ghigliazza, R.M., Altendorfer, R., Holmes, P., Koditschek, D. (2005). A Simply Stabilized Running Model. SIAM Review,47(3), 519549.


1.1.1-4.1 Leg/footperturbations

2 .2 .1 Up ri gh t S ta nc e S ta bi li ty Pe rt urba ti ons c an be rel at ivel y s us ta ined change s i n dynam ic s s uc h a s runni ngthrough thick brush or water, or with exoskeletons or other loads on the legs.Perturbations also can be momentary disturbances such as a tripping hazard.

Haudum, A., Birklbauer, J., Krll, J., & Mller, E. (2012). Constraint-led changes in internal variability in running. Journalof Sports Science and Medicine, 11, 8-15.

Seay, J.F., Haddad, J.M., van Emmerik, R.E.A.,& Hamill, J, (2006). Coordination Variability Around the Walk to RunTransition During Human Locomotion. Motor Control, 10, 178196.

1 .1 .1-4 .2 Torso perturbat ions 2 .2 .1 Upright Stance Stabi li ty Perturbat ions can be relat ively susta ined changes in dynamics such as runningthrough thick brush, or with exoskeletons, or other loads on the torso or limbs.Perturbations also can be momentary disturbances such as a shift in load orasymmetrical load that creates cross-coupling forces due to the moment-of-inertia tensor and potentially destabilizing coriolis motions at the head, althoughresearch is needed in this area.

Pontzer, H., Holloway, J.H., Raichlen, D.A., & Lieberman, D.E. (2009). Control and function of arm swing in humanwalking and running. The Journal of Experimental Biology 212, 523-534.

Willems, P.A., Cavagna, G.A., & Heglund, N.C. (1995). External, internal, and total work in human locomotion. TheJournal of Experimental Biology, 198, 379393.

1.1.1-4.3 Opticalperturbations

2 .2 .1 Up ri gh t S ta nc e S ta bi li ty Opt ic al in fo rm at io n ( e. g., fl ow fi el ds ) p la y a n i mpor ta nt ro le in the c ontrol oflocomotion but it is not sufficient. Intermodal invariants are required todisambiguate different causes of motion and to coordinate the multiple degreesof freedom involved in the control of human movement (multi-input/multi-output or MIMO control). Proprioceptive systems are utilized along with visualand vestibular systems to pick up information in intermodal invariants.


Warren, W.H. (1998). Perception of heading is a brain in the neck. Nature: Neuroscience, 1(8), 647-649.

1.1.1-5 Target Following 4.3.1 PerceiveObjects/Surroundings

Trac ki ng A n e xt ensi ve body of wo rk on huma n c ontrol of phys ic al syst em s c an prov ide asource of innovation and insight in the study of human control of pedallocomotion. There is a principled and utilitarian distinction between targetfollowing and disturbance regulation in this literature.

Baron, S. (1979). A brief overview of the theory and application of the optimal control model of the human operator.Unpublished manuscript. Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Beranek, & Newman.

Jex, H.R., Magdaleno, R.E., Jewell. W.F., Junker, A., & McMillan, G. (1981). Effects of target tracking motion simulatordrive-logic filters. AFAMRL-TR-80-134. WPAFB, OH: Air Force Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory.

1.1.1-5.1 Target acquisition 5.4.1 Approach Target acquisition/interception Trajectories of interception assume or otherwise are constrained by thedynamics of locomotor systems which include the support surface dynamics andlayout as well as the body and any carried load.

Warren, W.H., & Fajen, B.R. (2007). Behavioral dynamics of intercepting a moving target. Experimental Brain Research,180, 303319.

Shaffer, D.M., & Gregory, T.B. (2009). How football flayers determine where to run to tackle other players: A

mathematical and psychological description and analysis. The Open Sports Sciences Journal, 2, 29-36.

1.1.1-5.2 Unit cohesion 5.4.3 Maintain Distance Relative object motion Interpersonal coordination dynamics is a relative new area of research.Research on team sports is useful source of innovation for studying unitcohesion especially through a dynamical systems approach in which there is thepromise of commensurability in modeling the constraints of load and its effectson human movement.

Passos, P., Arajo, D., Keith Davids, K., Gouveia, L., Serpa, S. (2006). Interpersonal dynamics in sport: The role ofartificial neural networks and 3-D analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 38(4), 683-691.

Davids, K., Button, C., Arajo, D., Renshaw, I., & Hristovski, R. (2006). Movement Models from Sports ProvideRepresentative Task Constraints for Studying Adaptive Behavior in Human Movement Systems. Adaptive Behavior,14(1), 7395.

1.1.1-5.3 Dynamic visualacuity

4.1.2 Eye movements Dynamic visual acuity Perturbations to the head during locomotion present a challenge to the visualsystem. Imperfect compensation for such perturbations by the oculomotor andhead-neck system lead to blur of the retinal image that in many ways is likeblur due to optical imperfections in the lens of the eye. Dynamic visual acuitythus can be assessed with optometric methods analogous to those used inconventional eye examinations. Modifications to such methods can be designedto address uniquely biomechanical patterns of blur such as asymmetry.

Riccio, G., & McDonald, P. & Bloomberg, J. (1999). Multimodal Perception and Multicriterion Control of Nested Systems:III. A Functional Visual Assessment Test for Human Health Maintenance and Countermeasures, NASA/TP-1999-3703c,Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX.

Joseph L. Demer, J. & Firooz Amjadi, F. (1993). Dynamic visual acuity of normal subjects during vertical optotype andhead motion. Investiga

Date post:	03-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dr-gary-e-riccio
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Consilience in Situated Physical Ergonomics

Documents