Cognitive Manufacturing in Industry 4.0 toward Cognitive Load Reduction: A Conceptual Framework
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- SRQ1: What causes cognitive overload in manufacturing environments?
- SRQ2: Which are the technologies that are able to reduce the cognitive load in manufacturing environments?
- SRQ3: Which are the cognitive manufacturing applications that use technologies that reduce the cognitive load?
1.1. Cognitive Manufacturing
1.2. Cognitive Load in Manufacturing
- Intrinsic—cognitive load related to a topic or task. We can consider this type as the objective difficulty of a task;
- Extraneous—the manner in which the data or tasks are exhibited. How we find data decides the assets we have available to interpret it;
- Germane—the germane load is created by the development of schemas; it helps in learning new skills and other data.
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
3.1. SRQ1: What Causes Cognitive Overload in Manufacturing Environments?
3.2. SRQ2: What Are the Human–Computer Interaction Technologies That Reduce the Cognitive Load in Manufacturing Environments?
- Digital work instructions guide workers through complex procedures, progressing with them, introducing them to the data they need when they need it, decreasing stress, and removing common sources of error [17]. As summed up in [39], reading on high-quality computer displays can be done as fast as reading on paper. A smarter operator [40] interacts with an AI personal assistant, thereby reducing the probability of mistakes happening [41]. This interaction can happen through virtual or augmented reality (virtual operator or augmented operator [40]). Some relevant Industry 4.0 technologies are in-view instructions using head-mounted displays, tablet instructions, projection-based in situ instructions, and step-by-step instructions that guide the worker through the whole process [42].
- Digital training applications help streamline the learning procedure by exhibiting data to the learner through focused, interactive modules. These applications can be designed explicitly for the assignment being referred to, so that workers can be instructed on the exact task that they will perform [17]. Industry 4.0 technologies related to training might include virtual, augmented, and smarter operators [40], whereby workers can be trained using, for example, e-learning [43], virtual reality [44], and augmented reality [45].
- Real-time analytics dashboards can help lessen the attention and energy given to pre-analysis of data by indicating expert data on the performance of humans and machines, thereby simplifying how data are gathered and introduced [17]. This can only be performed due to the use of Industry 4.0 technology such as machine learning, turning “big data” into “smart data” [46], and using AI incorporated into human–machine interfaces to support decision-making [47].
- Augmented reality (AR) reduces human errors and lightens the memory use of the operator, safely replicating the environment [47]. With AR, there is no compelling reason to change focus between the digital and physical worlds and no compelling reason to withdraw from a task to chase applicable data about what to do straight away or how to do it [30]. Augmented operators [40] have their working environment enriched by digital information, which reduces human error and improves decision-making by displaying feedback in real time [41].
- Inline quality checks allow addressing some quality issues that are extremely small and barely detectable by eye, as well as others that are the consequence of worker fatigue. Regardless of the reason, numerous quality issues are accepted due to failures in identifying them. All manufacturers have some convention for checking quality inline; however, if the workers have the correct tools, they will be able to catch more nonconformances, prompting fewer rework hours [32]. Some examples of Industry 4.0 technologies for quality checks are automated solutions [48] and machine vision systems [49,50].
3.3. SRQ3: Which Are the Cognitive Manufacturing Applications That Use Technologies That Reduce the Cognitive Load?
- Asset performance management (APM) frequently catches information and data that are connected with asset condition, to provide a comprehensive perspective of the performance of the asset. The data are then used for reliability analytics and asset health visualization, to help the improvement and tweaking of different asset models [52].Companies can use cognitive APM to sense, diagnose, and communicate performance issues to lessen unwanted downtime. The application can envision a potential failure and then investigate data from important user manuals or technician logs to comprehend how a previous similar issue was resolved, using this information to prescribe explicit activities or answers to fix the issue [6].
- Process and quality improvement are represented throughout the manufacturing process. The numerous attributes that impact product quality can be monitored and understood by utilizing cognitive manufacturing tools. Potential quality issues can be recognized earlier by using analytics, algorithms, automated visual inspections, and machine learning instead of customary methods [6]. The symbiosis between the operator and the cyber-physical system (CPS) allows new margins for controlling and improving picking activities [36]. New strategies were suggested where operator cognition is enhanced by moving between assembly modes [53].
- Resource optimization in cognitive manufacturing can help in guaranteeing laborer safety and health. Equipment with sensors that identify immediately hazardous circumstances ensure laborer safety and improve operations in energy resource optimization. Moreover, the use of IoT, data analytics, and machine learning allows evaluating the factors that contribute to energy consumption and in improving floor planning and scheduling. This can be done to optimize the configuration of a production line to balance the workload between stations, as well as use labor more efficiently, increase the rate of production, and optimize available plant capacity [6]. To perform this, ergonomic aspects must be considered, since they are changing as the world advances to Industry 4.0; thus, the discipline must adapt to this new paradigm and its new methods [54].
- Supply chain optimization in cognitive manufacturing gathers different data from structured and unstructured data sources so as to limit supply chain costs, disruptions, and risks. Alerts that describe the threat and present the information in a proper manner to help in decision making, as well as search for alternative suppliers and recommend solutions, represent some of the solutions that a cognitive manufacturing tool can offer [6]. Most companies poorly integrate technology into their supply chain, whereas an optimized supply chain will develop new value propositions and allow meeting new business needs [55].
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Stephen DeAngelis, Industry 4.0: The Emergence of Cognitive Manufacturing. March 2019. Available online: https://www.enterrasolutions.com/blog/industry-4-0-the-emergence-of-cognitive-manufacturing/ (accessed on 1 September 2019).
- Santos, B.P.; Charrua-Santos, F.; Lima, T.M. Industry 4.0: An Overview. Lecture Notes in Engineering and Computer Science; Newswood Limited: London, UK, 2018; Volume 2236, pp. 415–420. ISBN 978-988140489-3. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, J.; He, K.; Yuan, Q.; Chen, M.; Du, R.; Xiang, Y. Blind filtering at third parties: An efficient privacy-preserving framework for location-based services. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2018, 17, 2524–2535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ge, X.; Pan, L.; Li, Q.; Mao, G.; Tu, S. Multipath cooperative communications networks for augmented and virtual reality transmission. IEEE Trans. Multimed. 2017, 19, 2345–2358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hu, L.; Miao, Y.; Wu, G.; Hassan, M.M.; Humar, I. iRobot-Factory: An intelligent robot factory based on cognitive manufacturing and edge computing. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 90, 569–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IBM Corporation. Cognitive Manufacturing: An Overview and Four Applications that are Transforming Manufacturing Today; IBM Corporation: Armonk, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Karwowski, W.; Kosiba, E.; Benabdallah, S.; Salvendy, G. A framework for development of fuzzy GOMS model for human-computer interaction. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 1990, 2, 287–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thorvald, P.; Lindblom, J.; Andreasson, R. On the development of a method for cognitive load assessment in manufacturing. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 2019, 59, 252–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoedt, S.; Claeys, A.; van Landeghem, H.; Cottyn, J. The evaluation of an elementary virtual training system for manual assembly. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 55, 7496–7508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chouchene, A.; Carvalho, A.; Charrua-Santos, F.; Lima, T.M.; Osório, G.J.; Barhoumi, W. Artificial Intelligence for Product Quality Inspection toward Smart Industries: Quality Control of Vehicle Non-Conformities. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, 11–13 February 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Stephanidis, C.; Salvendy, G.; Antona, M.; Chen, J.Y.; Dong, J.; Duffy, V.G.; Fang, X.; Fu, L.P.; Mori, H.; Guo, Y.; et al. Seven HCI Grand Challenges. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2019, 35, 1229–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bannert, M. Managing cognitive load—Recent trends in cognitive load theory. Learn. Instr. 2002, 12, 139–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindblom, J.; Thorvald, P. Towards a framework for reducing cognitive load in manufacturing personnel. Adv. Cogn. Eng. Neuroergon. 2014, 11, 233–244. Available online: Ibm.com/downloads/cas/VDNKMWM6 (accessed on 1 September 2019).
- Chandler, P.; Sweller, J. Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction. Cogn. Instr. 1991, 8, 293–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sweller, J. Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cogn. Sci. 1988, 12, 257–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paas, F.; Renkl, A.; Sweller, J. Cognitive Load Theory: Instructional Implications of the Interaction between Information Structures and Cognitive Architecture. Instr. Sci. 2004, 32, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- John, K. How Augmentation Can Reduce Cognitive Load and Improve Decision Making in Manufacturing. July 2019. Available online: https://tulip.co/blog/augmentation/cognitive-load/ (accessed on 1 September 2019).
- Hutchins, E. Cognition in the Wild; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1995; Available online: https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/cognition-wild (accessed on 1 December 2020).
- Lim, Y.M.; Ayesh, A.; Stacey, M. Continuous Stress Monitoring under Varied Demands Using Unobtrusive Devices. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2020, 36, 326–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Andreasson, R. Interruptions in Manufacturing from A Distributed Cognition Perspective; University of Skövde: Skövde, Sweden, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Kolbeinsson, A.; Lindblom, J. Mind the Body: How Embodied Cognition Matters in Manufacturing. Procedia Manuf. 2015, 3, 5184–5191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Iqbal, S.T.; Bailey, B.P. Effects of intelligent notification management on users and their tasks. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems—CHI ’08, Florence, Italy, 5–10 April 2008; p. 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lindblom, J.; Gündert, J. Managing mediated interruptions in manufacturing: Selected strategies used for coping with cognitive load. In Advances in Neuroergonomics and Cognitive Engineering; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; Volume 488. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, B.C.; Duffy, V.G. The effects of task interruption on human performance: A study of the systematic classification of human behavior and interruption frequency. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf. 2015, 25, 137–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paas, F.G.W.C.; van Merriënboer, J.J.G. Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 1994, 6, 351–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Biondi, F.N.; Cacanindin, A.; Douglas, C.; Cort, J. Overloaded and at Work: Investigating the Effect of Cognitive Workload on Assembly Task Performance. Hum. Factors 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bläsing, D.; Hinrichsen, S.; Bornewasser, M. Reduction of Cognitive Load in Complex Assembly Systems. In International Conference on Human Interaction and Emerging Technologies; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 1152, p. 500. [Google Scholar]
- Hinrichsen, S.; Adrian, B.; Bornewasser, M. Information Management Strategies in Manual Assembly. In International Conference on Human Interaction and Emerging Technologies; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 1152, p. 525. [Google Scholar]
- Mattsson, S.; Fast-Berglund, Å.; Li, D. Evaluation of Guidelines for Assembly Instructions. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2016, 49, 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, H.; Prabhu, V.V. Evaluating Impact of AI on Cognitive Load of Technicians during Diagnosis Tasks in Maintenance. In Advances in Production Management Systems. Smart Manufacturing for Industry 4.0; Moon, I., Lee, G.M., Park, J., Kiritsis, D., von Cieminski, G., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 536, pp. 27–34. [Google Scholar]
- Zayour, I.; Lethbridge, T.C. Adoption of reverse engineering tools: A cognitive perspective and methodology. In Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Program Comprehension 2001, Toronto, ON, Canada, 12–13 May 2001; pp. 245–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murauer, N.; Müller, F.; Günther, S.; Schön, D.; Pflanz, N.; Funk, M. An Analysis of Language Impact on Augmented Reality Order Picking Training. In Proceedings of the 11th PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments Conference on—PETRA ’18, Corfu, Greece, 26–29 June 2018; pp. 351–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baechler, A.; Baechler, L.; Autenrieth, S.; Kurtz, P.; Hoerz, T.; Heidenreich, T.; Kruell, G. A comparative study of an assistance system for manual order picking—Called pick-by-projection—With the guiding systems pick-by-paper, pick-by-light and pick-by-display. In Proceedings of the 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2016, Koloa, HI, USA, 5–8 January 2016; pp. 523–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Funk, M.; Mayer, S.; Nistor, M.; Schmidt, A. Mobile in-situ pick-by-vision: Order picking support using a projector helmet. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments, Corfu Island, Greece, 29 June–1 July 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kujawińska, A.; Vogt, K. Human Factors in Visual Quality Control. Manag. Prod. Eng. Rev. 2015, 6, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Guerin, C.; Rauffet, P.; Chauvin, C.; Martin, E. Toward production operator 4.0: Modelling Human-Machine Cooperation in Industry 4.0 with Cognitive Work Analysis. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2019, 52, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allen, R.B. Cognitive factors in human interaction with computers. Behav. Inf. Technol. 1982, 1, 257–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hassenzahl, M.; Tractinsky, N. User experience—A research agenda. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2006, 25, 91–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shibata, H.; Omura, K.; Qvarfordt, P. Optimal Orientation of Text Documents for Reading and Writing. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2020, 35, 70–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero, D.; Stahre, J.; Wuest, T.; Noran, O.; Bernus, P.; Fast-Berglund, Å.; Gorecky, D. Towards an Operator 4.0 Typology: A Human-Centric Perspective on the Fourth Industrial Revolution Technologies. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Romero2/publication/309609488_Towards_an_Operator_40_Typology_A_Human-Centric_Perspective_on_the_Fourth_Industrial_Revolution_Technologies/links/58e435e7a6fdccc85bdf36fa/Towards-an-Operator-40-Typology-A-Human-Centric-Perspective-on-the-Fourth-Industrial-Revolution-Technologies.pdf (accessed on 1 December 2020).
- Madonna, M.; Monica, L.; Anastasi, S.; di Nardo, M. Evolution of Cognitive Demand in the Human–Machine Interaction Integrated with Industry 4.0 Technologies. Wit Trans. Built Environ. 2019, 189, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pimminger, S.; Neumayr, T.; Panholzer, L.; Augstein, M.; Kurschl, W. Reflections on Work Instructions of Assembly Tasks. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems (ICHMS), Rome, Italy, 7–9 September 2020; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clarizia, F.; de Santo, M.; Lombardi, M.; Santaniello, D. E-Learning and Industry 4.0: A Chatbot for Training Employees. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress on Information and Communication Technology, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, London, UK, 20–21 February 2020; Springer: Singapore, 2020; Volume 1184. [Google Scholar]
- Kwegyir-Afful, E.; Kantola, J. Simulation-Based Safety Training for Plant Maintenance in Virtual Reality. In Advances in Simulation and Digital Human Modeling; Cassenti, D.N., Scataglini, S., Rajulu, S.L., Wright, J.L., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 1206, pp. 167–173. [Google Scholar]
- Pilati, F.; Faccio, M.; Gamberi, M.; Regattieri, A. Learning manual assembly through real-time motion capture for operator training with augmented reality. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 45, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luntovskyy, L.; Globa, L.; Shubyn, B. From Big Data to Smart Data: The Most Effective Approaches for Data Analytics. In Advances in Information and Communication Technology and Systems; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; Volume 152. [Google Scholar]
- Zolotová, I.; Papcun, P.; Kajáti, E.; Miškuf, M.; Mocnej, J. Smart and cognitive solutions for Operator 4.0: Laboratory H-CPPS case studies. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 139, 105471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dacal-Nieto, A.; Fernandez-Gonzalez, C.; Alonso-Ramos, V.; Antequera-Garcia, G.; Ríos, C. eQUALS: Automated Quality Check System for Paint Shop. In Advanced Manufacturing and Automation IX; Wang, Y., Martinsen, K., Yu, T., Wang, K., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2020; Volume 634, pp. 402–409. [Google Scholar]
- Frustaci, F.; Perri, S.; Cocorullo, G.; Corsonello, P. An embedded machine vision system for an in-line quality check of assembly processes. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 42, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cicconi, P.; Raffaeli, R. An Industry 4.0 Framework for the Quality Inspection in Gearboxes Production. CADandA 2019, 17, 813–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanti, S. How Cogntiive Technologies Are Redefining the Future of Manufacturing? 21 January 2019. Available online: https://www.analyticsinsight.net/how-cognitive-technologies-are-redefining-the-future-of-manufacturing/ (accessed on 21 February 2020).
- Gary West, Asset Performance Management (APM)—What Is an Asset Performance Management System? 30 April 2019. Available online: www.assetivity.com.au/article/reliability-improvement/asset-performance-management-what-is-an-asset-performance-management-system.html (accessed on 20 February 2020).
- Mattsson, S.; Fast-Berglund, Å.; Li, D.; Thorvald, P. Forming a cognitive automation strategy for Operator 4.0 in complex assembly. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2020, 139, 105360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holman, M.; Walker, G.; Lansdown, T.; Hulme, A. Radical systems thinking and the future role of computational modelling in ergonomics: An exploration of agent-based modelling. Ergonomics 2020, 63, 1057–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GCC International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Gulf Cooperation Council, and Industrial Engineering & Operations Management Society. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, 26–28 November 2019.
Causes of Cognitive Overload | Literature |
---|---|
Interruptions | According to [20,21,22,23], interruptions are identified as being an essential driver to cognitive overload, which influences the human’s capacity to perform effectively. The authors of [24] stated that interruptions are identified as being an essential driver to cognitive overload, which influences the human’s capacity to perform effectively. |
Training/instructional situations | The authors of [25] stated that training in some areas commonly speaks to circumstances that are near the breaking point of trainees’ capacities, forcing cognitive overload. |
Manual assembly | The authors of [9] mentioned that, because of the strategies of manufacturing companies, manual assemblers face a bigger cognitive load than in past times. The authors of [26] demonstrated that the work performed under cognitive overload affects assembly task completion times. The authors of [27] studied a reduction in cognitive load in complex assembly systems. The authors of [28] mentioned the information management strategies in manual assembly. The authors of [29] evaluated the guidelines for assembly instructions. The authors of [8] developed a method for cognitive load assessment. |
Maintenance activities | The authors of [30] developed an AI tool to test if, among other aspects, the cognitive load of the maintenance workers using an AI-based system would be lower. The authors of [31] studied a cognitive perspective and methodology for reverse engineering tools. |
Order picking | The authors of [32] stated that order picking is a demanding task at the cognitive level. The authors of [33] demonstrated the significant effect of for pinking tasks on human capacities and error rate by recording the human cognitive load, while the authors of [34] studied the order picking process using a projector helmet. |
Visual inspection/quality inspection | The authors of [35] based their work on the knowledge that visual control does not ensure a completely correct assessment, due to constrained human reliability that is influenced by several elements which impact the capacity of a human to properly evaluate the quality of the procedure and/or product. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Carvalho, A.V.; Chouchene, A.; Lima, T.M.; Charrua-Santos, F. Cognitive Manufacturing in Industry 4.0 toward Cognitive Load Reduction: A Conceptual Framework. Appl. Syst. Innov. 2020, 3, 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi3040055
Carvalho AV, Chouchene A, Lima TM, Charrua-Santos F. Cognitive Manufacturing in Industry 4.0 toward Cognitive Load Reduction: A Conceptual Framework. Applied System Innovation. 2020; 3(4):55. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi3040055
Chicago/Turabian StyleCarvalho, Adriana Ventura, Amal Chouchene, Tânia M. Lima, and Fernando Charrua-Santos. 2020. "Cognitive Manufacturing in Industry 4.0 toward Cognitive Load Reduction: A Conceptual Framework" Applied System Innovation 3, no. 4: 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi3040055
APA StyleCarvalho, A. V., Chouchene, A., Lima, T. M., & Charrua-Santos, F. (2020). Cognitive Manufacturing in Industry 4.0 toward Cognitive Load Reduction: A Conceptual Framework. Applied System Innovation, 3(4), 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi3040055