Modular Training System for Adaptive Student Assessment

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current aircraft training simulators face limitations in scalability, reliability, and adaptability, leading to inefficient training due to bottlenecks in instructor-student ratios, limited automated feedback, and the inability to account for new tactics or guidelines without costly code modifications.

Innovation Solution

A modular training system comprising a data collector, assessment, and instructor system that generates and reacts to simulation events using rules, allowing for flexible and adaptive training scenarios without modifying existing simulation software, enabling real-time feedback and improved student performance assessment.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If automated performance and assessment systems are used in simulations, then productivity and scalability are improved, but the skills and feedback provided are limited compared to human instructors

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetraining throughputVSAvoidfeedback quality
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

An automated assessment system acts as an intermediary between the simulation environment and students, collecting simulation data and generating events that trigger instructional mentoring messages. This intermediary layer enables scalable automated training while preserving feedback quality by systematically processing simulation data and selecting appropriate mentoring content from a database, rather than relying solely on human instructors or basic automated systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Adaptability or versatility

If more instructors are hired to reduce student-instructor ratio, then feedback quality and adaptability are improved, but cost and system complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinstructional adaptabilityVSAvoidtraining system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system creates virtual copies of instructor functionality through automated assessment modules that collect simulation data, generate events, and select appropriate instructional mentoring messages from a database. These virtual instructor copies can serve multiple students simultaneously while maintaining adaptability, as the same modular assessment logic can be replicated and configured for different training scenarios without requiring additional human instructors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

3Adaptability or versatility

If simulation software code is modified to add new tactics or guidelines, then adaptability is improved, but cost and time requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecurriculum flexibilityVSAvoidsystem modification ease
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The assessment system is segmented into modular components: data collection modules that gather simulation data, event generation modules that apply rules to create events, and message selection modules that choose appropriate instructional mentoring from a database. This segmentation allows new tactics or guidelines to be added by creating new modular assessment components or updating database content, rather than modifying the core simulation software code, thereby maintaining curriculum flexibility while reducing modification complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentUS8170976B2Assessing student performance and providing instructional mentoring
Publication Date: 2012.05.01 THE BOEING CO
  • US8170976B2 patent drawing
  • US8170976B2 patent drawing
  • US8170976B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method, apparatus, and computer program product are present for performing a simulation. The simulation is executed. Simulation data is collected while executing the simulation to form collected simulation data. A number of events is generated by applying a first number of rules to the collected simulation data to form a number of generated events. A number of commands is generated as a reaction to the number of generated events by applying a second number of rules to the number of generated events to form a number of simulation commands. The number of simulation commands is sent to the simulation.