Carl Westin

188 Conformance design A-1-2 Decoding solutions Controllers’ solutions to all designed conflicts in the prequel simulation were man- ually analyzed and decoded. The decoding transcript describes each solution ac- cording to a standardized pattern , defined by the solution parameter framework. Table A-1 shows the standardized template format in which all solutions have been entered for controller A. In this example, the decoded solutions for the designed conflict in Study 2 are shown for all four scenario replicates (1A through 1D). Note that for scenario 1A, the solution consisted of interacting with both aircraft: initially vectoring QS1338 left at time log 32, then vectoring OM3185 left at time log 47. In contrast to controller A in the example above, others were considerably less consistent in their conflict solving. Table A-2 shows controller B’s solutions for the designed conflict in Study 2. Controller B consistently interacted with both aircraft, at least once. In 1C and 1D three interactions were needed to solve the conflict. In three out of four solutions, controller B interacted with QS1338 first and then OM3185. In addition, controller B occasionally used speed to solve the conflict. A-1-3 Define problem-solving style A controller’s problem-solving style represents general preference characteristics for solving a particular conflict. It is determined from comparing a controller’s tran- scribed solution patterns for a repeatedly encountered conflict and identifying simi- larities. The problem-solving style specifies the preferred aircraft, resolution, direc- tion, and directional value. A rationale supporting the identified problem-solving style is provided. Table A-3 shows the problem-solving style for controller A. The problem-solving style for controller A, for this particular conflict, consisted of vec- toring OM3185 to the right behind QS1338. In this case, the problem-solving style was easy to determine because of the high degree of similarity (three out of four solutions). However, it was sometimes difficult to determine a controller’s problem- solving style because of a large variability in solutions across scenario repetitions. Table A-4 shows the problem-solving style for controller B. Controller B’s problem- solving style was determined to be a combination of heading and speed: to simulta- neously instruct QS1338 to turn right and increase speed. T ABLE A-3: Problem-solving style for controller A Aircraft ID Resolution type Direction Value Rationale OM3185 Heading Right 35 ◦ OM turned right in three out of four sce- narios. Only relied on heading to solve all designed conflicts. No use of speed.