383
1 INTRODUCTION
Inrecentyears,theinterestintheissueofsafetyhad
improved considerably around the world.
Continuous growth of threats from terrorism,
organized crime, illicit drug trafficking, mass
immigrationand cyberattacksleadsinescapably to a
demand for constant monitoring for safety of
territories and peoples. For monitoring and
safety
management rigorous methods, new modern
technological solutions and corresponding
organizational and human resources are needed.
Also, we need a new decision support systems that
will allow to integrate information and knowledge
abouttheenvironmentinanunitedinformationfield
and to perform joint decision‐making for hazard
prevention. The
major goal of these systems is
collection and processing of data from different
heterogeneous and highly dynamic information
sources. The main problem related with collection
and processing of a large volumes of data is an
information system’s overload. This problem can be
solved by identifying the content relevance of a
concrete
information source. The second problem is
connected to analysis and classification of danger
situations that influence safety, to generation of
concretesolutionsandofresponsestothem.Itshould
benotedthatthetechnologyofsituationawarenessis
a key to decision support system in safety domain.
Thistechnologyallows
tosupportdecisionmakersby
means of fusion of all available information, to
allocate information more relevant for decision
making process and to recognize potentially
dangerousandsignificantsituations.
Considering the maritime domain, millions of
vessels follow a predetermined course every day.
Having analyzed the reports of the marine insurers
about
maritime incidents, the most cases have
happened not in the open sea but near the coasts,
closetoriversandcanals,wherewehavetheshallow
water and heavy vessel traffic. Usually, the pirate
attackalsooccursintheterritorialwatersnearcoasts.
The majority of the nautical errors relate
to
grounding, striking of underwater formations and
barriers near coast lines. In 70 to 80% of cases, the
Situation Awareness for Navigation Safety Control
O.V.Smirnova
St.PetersburgInstituteforInformaticsandAutomationoftheRussianAcademyofSciences,St.Petersburg,Russia
ABSTRACT: Situation awareness is the key element of the decision‐making process. In navigation safety
domain, monitoring, control, assessment of dangerous situations, support of operators of decision‐making
support system should be implemented in real
time. In this paper we present the problem of situation
awarenessappliedtonavigation safetycontrol.Thepaperconsidersexistingmodelsofsituationawarenessand
ontology‐basedapproachformaritimesituationawareness.Weintroducethesituationconceptusinginfons.
Finally,wegiveanexamplehowusethesemethods fordesign
andcreation ofdecision‐supportsystem for
navigationsafetycontrol.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 12
Number 2
June 2018
DOI:10.12716/1001.12.02.20
384
causeof incidentsarenottechnicalfault ordamage,
butthe humanerrors[1].Aninadequateassessment
ofthesituationisthemostcommonreasonofmaking
the wrong decision. Therefore, the continuous
analysisofcurrentsituationsandassessmentoftheir
influenceonthewholemaritimesituationisneeded.
Safe
navigationimpliescollection,processingand
identification of relevance of information, obtained
fromheterogeneoussources.Theinformationsources
fordangeroussituationawarenesscanbe:AIS,radar
data, information about presence of navigational
hazards, closed areas, ice and hydro meteorological
situations. It should be noted that the information
volume increase considerably in
heavy vessel traffic
areas, in narrowwatersandports. Thus, the critical
information could be missed and importance of the
availableinformationcouldbeincorrectly evaluated.
Ultimately, it leads to the wrong assessment of the
dangeroussituation.Itisworthpointingoutthatthe
capacitiesoftheoperatoronassessmentof
thecurrent
situationare verylimited, particularlyin thecase of
thevolumeofacquiredinformation.Theoperatorcan
notcollect,analyzeandinterpretthisinhomogeneous
informationquicklyandefficiently.Forthisreasonit
is necessary to develop new methods and
technologies that will help operators in processes of
collection,
correctprocessing,situationawarenessand
interpretationofresults.
Themajorgoalofthispaperistheexpansionofthe
classical situation theory for maritime safety and
description of the principles of organization of
collaborative decision making system for maritime
safety. Also, we present a new method of situation
awarenessformaritime
domain.Thismethodallows
to describe different maritime situations such as
vessel collisions, ecological dangers, piracy,
navigation under very difficult conditions (ice
conditions, meteorological conditions, shallows) in
termsoftheinfonstheory.
2 ONTOLOGYFORNAVIGATIONSAFETY
DOMAIN
Initialdata formaritimesituationawarenessprocess
is information about vessels, sea
objects and
environment surrounding them. These data are
compiledfromdifferentsensors(mechanical,natural)
and provide information about properties and
characteristics of monitored vessels and others sea
objects. The ontology of knowledge representation
about maritime objects needs to be developed for
realizationoftheformalapproach of data collection
from sensors,
which monitor environment. The
ontology includes information about objects and
relations between them, reflects any valid object
changes and also measures their impact on the
current situation. In addition, the ontology must be
complete for realization of the real decision‐making
systeminnavigationsafetydomain.
Thenotion“ontology”had
firstbeenproposedby
R. Goclenius and used to refer to the branch of
philosophy that studies the fundamental basis of
existence. Different notions of ontology in computer
science are given in [2] among which we can be
emphasizethenotionofT.Gruber:“Anontologyisan
explicitspecificationofa
conceptualization”[3].
The ontology creation process for any system
includes:
definitionofthesubjectdomainandontologysize;
consideration of variants of recurrent‐use of the
existingontology;
listingofimportantconceptsinontology;
definitionof classesandclasses’ hierarchyonthe
basisof“is‐a”
and“kind‐of”relations;
definitionofclasspropertieswhicharecalledslots;
definitionofthefacetforslots.
The typical components of the ontology are the
following:
1 Concept is the complete collection of different
individuals thatsharethe most common features
which can be more or less significant.
While
developing ontology of subject domain, the
definitionofconcepts’structureofsubjectdomain
and logical relations between them, their
identification and formalization is being
implemented. The final result of development of
subjectdomain’sontologyisahierarchyofclasses
containingtheconceptsofthesubjectdomainand
relationsbetween
them.
Each concept is characterized by volume and
content.Thevolumeandcontentofconceptistwo
interrelatedsides of concept. The volumeisclass
ofgeneralizedobjectsintheconcept,butcontentis
collection of significant features by which the
generalizationandselectionoftheseobjectsinthis
conceptis
made.
2 Relationsintegrateclassesanddescribethem.The
mostcommontypeofrelationusedinontologyis
categories of relationships. This type of relations
has several other names such as taxonomy
relation, “is‐a” relation, class‐subclass, hyponym‐
hyperonym, subsumption relation, a‐kind ‐of
relation.
3 Axioms determine the
conditions for correlation
between categories and relations. They express
obviousstatements,whichareconnectedconcepts
and relations. Axiom is a statement, which is
entered in ontology performed, and another
statement canbe obtained from it.Theyallow to
showtheinformationwhichcannotbereflectedin
ontology through creation of
concept (class)
hierarchyanddifferentrelationsbetweenconcepts
(classes). Axioms allow to take forward the
reasoning within ontology. In addition, based on
axioms, we can form new rules which allow to
automaticallyaddnewcontextualinformationinto
ontology. Axioms can constitute of limitations
imposed on some relations and allow to
create
newstatements.
Inadditiontomajorcomponentslistedabovethe
ontology includes the instances that are concrete
elementsofsomecategory.
The basic requirements for ontology of
collaborative decision‐making system for navigation
safetydomainaccordingto[4]are:
simplicity: statements and relations need to be
simpletouse;
flexibility and scalability: the addition of new
concepts and relations in ontology must be clear
andaccessible;
385
universality:ontologyshouldsupportthedifferent
kindofcontextualinformationinnavigationsafety
domain;
expressivity: ontology should support the
description of necessary number of a ttributes for
contextual information in navigation safety
domain.
Thecoreofontologyfornavigationsafetydomain
isabstractclassSituation.Subclasses ofthis
classare
Goals, Objects and Relations. Entities of the subclass
Objects can be physical or abstract and can have
characteristics(Attributes).Theyalsocanparticipatein
relations. The class Attributes define specific object
characteristicssuchaslocation,speed,course,vessel’s
name.ThePhysicalObject subclassisaspecifictypeof
Objects subclass which is characterized by following
attributes: speed, draught and location. Relations
subclass define the relation between sets of Objects.
Forexample,inRangeOf(X,Y)relationmeansthatone
instance of PhysicalObject X is within the range of
second instance of PhysicalObject Y. An important
aspect of Attributes and Relations
classes is that they
includetwovalueswhichcanbechangedovertime.
EachoftheseclassesisconnectedwithPropertyValues
classandisdefinedbytwotimedependentfunctions,
thefirstcharacterizesthecurrentvalueandtheother
characterizes the changing over time value. A new
PropertyValues isgenerated for
Attributes or Relations
whenEventcomesonaffectingAttributesorRelations.
Therefore, the value of Attributes or Relations can be
defined on request to PropertyValues at any time
(current, past or future). Event contains information
about environment obtained from different
heterogeneoussources(sensors)atsomepointintime
thatinfluences
specificAttributesandRelations.Event
containsthespecificentities,whichsignalchangesof
currentsituationandthusarethemeansbywhichthe
situationrepresentationevolves.
3 SITUATIONAWARENESSFORNAVIGATION
SAFETYDOMAIN
3.1 Situationawareness
Intheearly1980sofXXcentury,thesituationtheory
was developed by J.Barwise
and J.Perry [5–7] and
then was successfully extended by K.Devlin and
D.Pospelov [8, 9]. The situation awareness term has
many definitions and understandings. For the first
time this definition had been introduced by
M.Endsley. According to the classical definition,
situationawarenessis“theperceptionoftheelements
in the environment
within a volume of time and
space, the comprehension of their meaning, and the
projectionoftheirstatusinthenearfuture”[10].This
basicdefinitionwasaddedbyC.Dominguezatal.[11]
under which situation awareness includes the four
components:
informationabouttheenvironment;
integration of this information
with internal
knowledgeofrelevanceformentalrepresentation
ofthissituation;
applicationofthisrepresentation forfuturestudy
ofcurrentsituationinperceptioncycle;
forecastingthefuturesituations.
In this paper situation awareness is, therefore,
understood to mean continuous obtaining of
information about the environment from
heterogeneous sources
in order to provide safety,
integratingofthisinformationintoknowledgeabout
thecurrent situationand analysisof theirimpact on
safety,forecastingoffuturesituationsandassessment
their influence on safety. The situation awareness
process lies in understanding of surrounding
environment and what is going on around for
awareness of
how information, situations and their
impact influence on the concrete goals and tasks in
the present and near future. Significant factors, that
influences the on the correct and timely decision
making in case of dangerous situations, is the
availability of complete, accurate and relevant
information to decision makers. However, the
decisionmakingprocessinrealsystemsfortheevent
of maritimedangerousdevelopments is complicated
by such specific factors as time limit for decision
making, accuracy and relevant information limit,
incorrect, unexpected and sudden‐onset situations
whichchangeinrealtime.
Oneofthefirstmodelforsituationawarenesswas
proposed
byM.Endsley[12]andincludesthreelevel
oftheinformationprocessing:
Level 1 (Perception of elements in the
environment)–perceptionofthecurrentsituation,
its properties and dynamic development of
elements, related to observed situation, in
environment.
Level2(Comprehensionofthecurrentsituation)–
synthesis
of the disconnected elements of the
situation receivedontheLevel 1, comprehension
and processing of information, integration of
various heterogeneousdata anddetermination of
itssignificanceforparticularsituation.
Level3(Projectionofthefuturestatus)–available
prognosis of future actions and future situation
development based on knowledge
of situation
statusanditselements’behavior,fortakingtimely
decisionsonfutureactions.
Nevertheless,itshouldbenotedthattheproblem
integrationofheterogeneousinformationintoasingle
comprehensive picture of the environment at the
semantic level of human comprehension and
projectionremainsopen.
3.2 Situationawarenessforsafe
navigation
Maritime situation is, therefore, understood to
represent a set of parameters which directly or
indirectly, defined status of the monitored maritime
objectatthemoment.Maritimesituationawarenessis
an instrument for analysis of specific characteristics
andparametersofthemonitoredmaritimeobjectfor
the purpose the obtained information about
its
current status and forecasting its status in the near
future [14]. In turn, the term maritime situation
managementimpliesfocusedinfluenceonnavigation
safety decision support system in order to improve
thequalityof decisionmaking.Thisimprovementis
in large part attributable to the changing of
properties, characteristics
and parameters of the
system.
386
Initial data for maritime situation awareness
process are information about vessels (vessel type,
draught,stability,floodability),locationofareaswith
solid ice cover, hydrometeorological conditions,
locationoftheclosedareasfornavigation,locationof
theenvironmentallyvulnerableareasandothers.
For situation awareness in navigation safety
domain,itisnecessary
tohavethefollowing:
information about environment: location of the
neighboring vessels, relationship among vessel
tracking management system and other vessels,
hydrometeorological conditions, status of the
marineenvironment,tidewater,steams.
informationabouttechnicalandinformationtools
of the vessel such as GPS, AIS, radar, gyro‐
compass,fathometer,
indicator.
informationaboutspatialorientation:thereshould
be real‐time information about dangerous
maritimesituations.
timemanagement:itisnecessarytohaveleadtime
for decision making in case of the dangerous
maritimesituation.
Ascanbeseenfromtheabovesituationawareness
for navigation safety implies efficient and
sufficient
assessmentofthecurrentsituationaswellasprompt
forecastofevolutionofthissituationinthecontextof
environment.
Accordingto [13]the informationaboutsituation
can be formalized in the terms of infons. Infon is
definedasfollows
,,...,,
1 ni
aaR
,
where
R
is n‐place relation;
n
aa ,...,
1
are objects
appropriatefor
R
,thatisobjectsappropriatetothe
same types as given relation;
is polarity of the
infon.If
1
thenobjectsstandintherelation
R
,
if
0
— otherwise. If we apply operations of
conjunction, disjunction and situation‐bounded
quantificationtoinfon, itwillallowustofuseseveral
simple infons into a compound infon. Relationships
among situations and infons is called supports
relationships. For given infon
and situation
s
statement
|s
can be written, which means that
situation
s supportsinfon .
Distinctivefeatureofthenavigationsafetysystem
is recognition of the situation types. System can
recognizethevarious types of objects,va rious types
of the relations, various types of activities, ect. The
basictypesforsituationawarenessarethefollowing
[8]: the type of a temporal location, the type of
a
spatiallocation,thetypeofanindividual,thetypeof
ann‐placerelation,thetypeonaninfon,thetypeofa
type,thetypeofaparameter,thetypeofapolarity.
ForanobjectxandatypeTcanbewrittenas:
Tx :
thatmeansthattheobjectxisoftypeT.
Itshouldbenotedthatdecisionforrealproblems
of navigation safety is often made in complex and
rapidlychangingenvironment,thus,decisionmaking
underconditionsof uncertainty becomes paramount
importance. For example, the solution task of the
navigation safety
any activities can have a
considerable effect on further development of the
currentsituation.
Any collaboration decision‐making system for
navigationsafetycanbesplitintotwosubsystem:
knowledgemanagementsubsystem;
navigationsafetysubsystem.
Knowledgemanagementsubsystemisintendedto
manage the whole knowledge domain while safety
subsystem
is implemented for specific monitored
object, in this case, for navigation safety. The main
tasks of the knowledge management subsystem are
thefollowing:
data analysis of monitored object: it carries out
collectionofprimarydatawhichareobtainedfrom
different heterogeneous sources (sensors, radars,
etc.)anditstransformationintoontological
format;
eventmanagement:itgeneratesusefulinformation
formonitoringsituation ontheobject inorder to
ensure safety. There are pla n to provide the
analysis of retrospective information about
dangerous situations and current information
aboutsituationonthemonitoredobject.
Navigationsafetysubsystemallowsto:
implement maritime situation
analysis and
realizationofthe mostappropriatecrisisscenario
of current situation development (for example,
vessels’ collisions, maneuvering in cramped
conditions);
keep logs on the monitored object and give an
alarmsignalifnecessary;
provide retrospective information about
dangerous situations on monitored object at the
users’request.
Assessment of
the dangerous maritime situations
lies in recognition of the following potentially
dangeroussituations:
roundingofclosed
zonefornavigation;
crossing of the border of traffic separation
schemes;
navigationhazards;
shallowwater;
collisionwithothervessel;
navigation in dangerous conditions (solid ice
cover,storms,heavyswell,frog,etc.).
Fromthisvarietyofsituationsforeachobjectsets
of parameters are formed that describe
the level of
danger for this object along predictable vessel’s
traffic. The whole information about navigation
hazards, shallow water zones, closed zones for
navigation, borders of traffic separation schemes
collaborative decision making system in navigation
safety domain can be obtain from Electronic Chart
Display.
Currently, the existing Electronic Chart Display
can
bedividedintothreegroups:
electronic chart display and information system
(ECDIS);
electronicchartsystem(ECS);
rasterchartdisplaysystem(RCDS).
Electronicchartdisplayandinformationsystemis
equivalent of the modern paper navigation charts
within the requirement of the Regulation V/20 of
SOLAS Convention [15]. ECDIS
provide
characteristicsandparametersofchartobjectssuchas
387
guidance, dangers, isobaths, the prohibited and
limited areas for navigation and details about the
conditions along vessel’s route for skippers at their
request.InadditiontothetraditionaltasksofECDIS
that include provisional and executive charting,
correction of the current location, new ECDIS tasks
aretheassessmentofnavigation
safety,correctionof
anelectronicchart,organizationofadvancealarmetc.
ECDIS displays accuracy cartographic data in real
time in conjunction with current location of vessels
obtainedfromDGPS,GPS.Systemalsoprocessesand
reportsinformationfromothernavigationsensors,for
example, hyro‐compass, lag, echo sounder, radar.
Fig.1
displaysthemajorcomponentsofECDIS.
Figure1.ThemajorcomponentsofECDIS.
4 CASESTUDY
Thecasestudyconsideredinthispaperinvolvesthe
followingscenariosofdangerousmaritimesituations:
navigation along the Northern Sea Route in
complexicesituation;
navigation in complex hydrometeorological
conditions(heavywind,frog);
oilspillasaresultoftwooiltankers’collision.
The situation
Navigation along the Northern Sea
Route in complex ice situation is called
IceDangerVessel. For this situation the following
relationscanbeseparated:
1 isNear(X, Y): it means the vessel is near an ice
cover which influences the future safety of
navigation with current values of speed, course
anddirection.In
thisrelation,thefirstparameterX
denotesanicecover,andthesecondparameterY
denotes a vessel. For this relation infon can be
writtenas:
>>,1=<< VesselIce,isNear,|esselIceDangerV
2 isClash(X,Y):itmeanscollisionofavessel(Y)with
solid ice cover (X). Infon for this relation can be
writtenas:
>>,1=<< VesselIce,isClush,|esselIceDangerV
3 isThreat(X, Y): the occurrence of a given event
suggeststhatthevessel(X)isshackledbytheice
cover (Y) and can not proceed with navigation.
Infonforthisrelationis:
>>,1=<< VesselIce,isThreat,|esselIceDangerV
4 isMoving(X):itpointsoutaunaryrelation,where
the single parameter X denotes a vessel in
movement. The infon for this relation is the
following:
>>,1=<< VesselisMoving,|esselIceDangerV
Another graphical show of infons for
IceDangerVesselsituationisgivenontheFig.2.
Figure2. Graphicalshow fortwo infons of IceDangerVessel
situation.
The situation Navigation in complex
hydrometeorological conditions is called
WeatherDangerVessel. This situation is akin to the
situation IceDangerVessel. For this situation the
followingrelationscanbeprovided:
1 isWind(X,Y): it means that vessel (Y) move in
severestormconditions(X).Infonforthisrelation
canbewrittenas:
>>,1=<< VesselWeather,isWind,|gerVesselWeatherDan
2 isFog(X,Y): it points out a binary relation where
the first parameter X is the current weather and
the second parameter Y is the vessel. Here the
vesselnavigatesinfog‐bankconditions.Theinfon
forthisrelationis:
>>,1=<< VesselWeather,isFog,|gerVesselWeatherDan
Fig.3showsdifferentrepresentationofinfonsfor
WeatherDangerVesselsituation.
Figure3.GraphicalshowofinfonsforWeatherDangerVessel
situation.
ThesituationOilspill asaresultoftwooiltankers’
collisioniscalledOilSpillArea.Incaseofthissituation
it is necessary to correct the planned route while
taking into account assumed rounding the oil spill
zone.Therelationinvolvedis:
1 isNear(X, Y):itmeans that the vessel
X isneara
zone of the two oil tankers’ collision and it
observes the oil spill. The navigation safety with
current parameters (speed, course, direction) is
388
impossible. This relation points out binary
relation, where the first parameter X denotes the
vesselandthesecondparameterdenotesthezone
oftheoilspill.Theinfonforthisrelationis:
>>,1=<< eaOilSpillArVessel,isNear,|eaOilSpillAr
For each infons mentioned above we can define
ruleswhichallowtodescribethesetofalldangerous
navigation actions in collaborative decision‐making
systeminnavigationsafetydomain.Fordevelopment
of the rule base of collaborative decision‐making
system,itisnecessaryinitiallytodefinephysicaland
abstract classes
of ontology for navigation safety
domain.
5 CONCLUSION
Onrush of information technologies and computer
hardware, automation of different kinds of physical
and mental human activity implies development of
new information tools and technologies to help
people. It should be note that situation theory for
navigationsafety presentedinthispaper is
far from
simple in terms of both understanding and
realization. However, it is aimed at dealing with
complex perceptual and cognitive problems. In any
sphereofhumanactivitytheeffectivenessofdecision
making in case of dangerous situations is directly
related to analysis of environment, collection of the
largevolumes
ofdatainnearreal‐time.Themodern
decision support systems can exercise the
computerized manipulation of large volume of data
bothonenvironmentandonsecurityformonitoring
region. Vigorouslydevelopingof telecommunication
systems, data transmission technologies allows to
transfer these volumes nearly all over the world.
Nowadays, nevertheless, the
main problem remains
providing precisely those data which are required
users for effective decision making in current
moment. The technology of maritime situation
awareness allows to offer users all necessary
informationfornavigationsafety.Thistechnologyisa
precursor of development of complete collaborative
decisionmakingsysteminnavigationsafety
domain.
Themajorgoalofthissystemisnavigationsafetyand
exchange of data from different heterogeneous
information sources between all participants in the
decision making process. It may be useful to utilize
the multi‐agent architecture for modeling of the
collaborative decision making system. Such
architecture allows to make the
system works on
solutionforproblem inconcretesubjectdomainand
toincreasetheeffectivenessofsituationawarenessby
applying, for example, the theory of fuzzy sets for
analysis of dangerous situations. Application of the
situation theory and fuzzy methods of decision
makingindesignofdecisionsupportsystemsallow:
to improve the process of operative navigation
safety;
to monitor the most dangerous maritime
situations;
to share data between different participants of
decisionmakingprocessandnavigationsafety;
to make decisions in navigation safety more
deliberateandcoherent.
Finally,itisappropriatetonotethatapplyingthe
situation theory should be a priority in research
where the initial data flows are unstructured, have
largevolumeandincorrectdecisionmakingleadsto
fatal consequences. Also, this theory permits the
constant operative control for current situation and
forecastingofthefuturesituationstakingintoaccount
thegiveninformationand
knowledge.
ACKNOLEDGMENTS
This research was supported by the Russian
FoundationforBasicResearch(RFBR):grant№18‐07‐
01203andwasimplementedwithinbudgetsupportof
SRWSPIIRAS№0073‐2014‐0005.
REFERENCES
[1]International Maritime Organization, URL:
http://www.imo.org
[2]Staab S., Studer R. Handbook on ontologies. Springer
DordrechtHeidelbergLondonNewYork,2003.
[3]GruberT.R.TranslationApproachtoPortableOntology
Specification. Knowledge Acquisition Journal, 1993,
vol.5,pp.199‐220.
[4]Korpipää P. and Mäntyjärvi J. An ontology for mobile
devicesensor‐basedcontextawareness.In:Proceedings
of CONTEXT, 2003,
vol. 2680 of Lecture Notes in
ComputerScience,2003,pp.451–458.
[5]Barwise J. Scenes and other situations. In: Journal of
Philosophy,78(7),1981,pp.369–397.
[6]BarwiseJ.Thesituationinlogic.In:CSLILectureNotes,
no.17,StandfordUniversity,California, 1989.
[7]Barwise J., PerryJ.Situations
and attitudes. MITPress,
Cambridge,MA,1989.
[8]Delvin K. Situation theory and situation semantics.
Handbook of the History of Logic 7. Elsevier North‐
Holland,Amsterdam,2006,pp.601–664.
[9]Pospelov D.A. Situacionnoe upravlenie: teoriya i
praktika.—M.:Nauka,1986.—288s.
[10]EndsleyM.R. Design and
Evaluation for Situation
Awareness Enhancement // Proceedings of theHuman
FactorsSociety32
nd
AnnualMeeting,vol.1,1988.—P.
97–101.
[11]Dominguez C., Vidulich M., Vogel E., McMillan G.
Situation Awareness: Papers and Annotated
bibliography. Armstrong Laboratory, Human System
Center,1994,pp.17–28.
[12]Endsley M.R. SAGAT: A Methodology for the
measurement of situation awareness. Hawthorne, CA:
NorthropCorp.
[13]
KokarM., MatheusC.J., Baclawski K.Ontology based
situation awareness.In: Journal of Information Fusion,
10(1),2009,pp.83–89.
[14]PopovichV.V.,SmirnovaO.V.,PopovichT.V.Maritime
Situation Monitoring for Safe Navigation on Northern
Sea Route. In: TransNav, The international Journal on
Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation,
vol.10,
no.3, 2016, pp.433‐440, doi:
10.12716/1001.10.03.08
[15]GuidanceonSOLASChaper–SafetyNavigation,URL:
http://solasv.mcga.gov.uk
