JP2008000230A - Response ability evaluation system and program - Google Patents

Abstract

<P>PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a response ability evaluation system and program objectively evaluating knowledge and behavior of a subject in abnormal situations. <P>SOLUTION: An evaluation section 20 evaluates whether or not a subject can, for example when meeting with an abnormal situation, define (perceive) or redefine the abnormal situation. The evaluation section 20 evaluates whether or not the subject can determine a response or appropriate measures such as an operation of an emergency brake, in the abnormal situation. The evaluation section 20 evaluates whether or not the subject can accurately operate, react or perform appropriate measures in an abnormal situation in a right order, such as lowering a pantograph, wirelessly transmitting it for security and igniting a fusee. Consequently, the evaluation section 20 can, for example, evaluate whether the subject is lacking in the awareness or not, to evaluate the behavior of the subject and evaluate whether the subject is lacking in the knowledge or not, to evaluate the knowledge of the subject. <P>COPYRIGHT: (C)2008,JPO&INPIT

Description

  The present invention relates to a response capability evaluation system and a response capability evaluation program for displaying an abnormal situation to a subject and evaluating the response capability of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation.

  The conventional learning system allows the teacher to select a display that displays the problematic road situation on the screen, a number for predicting a change in the problematic road situation, and a number for what action to take. A pointing device and an audio output circuit for explaining the result of the selected action by judging whether the predicted change in the road situation and the selected action are correct (for example, see Patent Document 1). In such a conventional learning system, driving of a car is learned by an interactive method so that a change in road conditions can be predicted and an appropriate action can be selected.

  Further, in the conventional customer service simulation training system, a step of setting a railway accident occurrence state, a step of detecting a corresponding operation of a station staff and a crew member in response to the accident occurrence state, and a response of a railroad user by the corresponding operation And a step of comparing the previous reaction state with the current reaction state and evaluating whether the situation is in the collecting direction, the current state maintenance state, or the deterioration direction (see, for example, Patent Document 2). In such a conventional customer service simulation training system, the station staff and the crew are trained to experience the customer service in the event of an abnormality such as an accident, thereby training the station staff and the crew.

Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 11-095646

Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 9-305098

  In the conventional learning system, the correctness of the learner's behavior is judged and the result of this behavior is explained by voice. For this reason, in the conventional learning system, the behavior of the learner is simply evaluated and the result of the evaluation is guided by voice, and not only the behavior of the learner but also whether the learner has sufficient knowledge. There is a problem that it is not possible to objectively evaluate and provide the teacher with an optimal training program according to the evaluation result.

  In addition, in the conventional customer service simulation training system, the response operation of the station staff and the crew is detected with respect to the accident occurrence situation, and the response of the railway user by this response operation is evaluated. For this reason, the conventional customer service simulation training system only evaluates the response of the railway user due to the response operation of the station staff and crew, and objectively evaluates the behavior and knowledge of the station staff and crew at the time of the accident. There is a problem that it is not possible to provide an optimal training program according to the evaluation result to station staff and crew.

  An object of the present invention is to provide a response capability evaluation system and a response capability evaluation program that can objectively evaluate the knowledge and behavior of a subject with respect to an abnormal situation.

The present invention solves the above-mentioned problems by the solving means described below.
In addition, although the code | symbol corresponding to embodiment of this invention is attached | subjected and demonstrated, it is not limited to this embodiment.
The invention of claim 1 is a response capability evaluation system that displays an abnormal situation on the subject (M) and evaluates the response capability of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation, and the subject perceives the abnormal situation. A perceptual evaluation means (20b) for evaluating whether or not, a judgment evaluation means (20c) for evaluating whether or not the subject has determined an appropriate countermeasure to be taken by the subject against the abnormal situation, Based on the evaluation results of the operation evaluation means (20d) for evaluating whether the subject has performed an appropriate operation for the abnormal situation, and the perceptual evaluation means, the judgment evaluation means, and the operation evaluation means, A response capability evaluation system (1) comprising response capability evaluation means (20d) for evaluating the response capability of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation.

  The invention according to claim 2 is the response capability evaluation system according to claim 1, further comprising question notifying means (17) for notifying the subject of a question for asking knowledge about the abnormal situation. It is a capacity evaluation system.

  A third aspect of the present invention is the response capability evaluation system according to the second aspect, wherein the question notification means is a work content and / or a work necessary for the subject to take an appropriate response to the abnormal situation. It is a response capability evaluation system characterized by notifying a question for asking basic knowledge about a procedure.

  According to a fourth aspect of the present invention, in the response capability evaluation system according to the third aspect, the question notifying means notifies the correct answer of the question and asks the subject to understand the meaning and / or positioning of the correct answer. This is a response capacity evaluation system characterized by notifying this subject of this question.

  The invention according to claim 5 is the correspondence ability evaluation system according to any one of claims 2 to 4, wherein the correspondence ability evaluation unit is configured to determine whether or not the subject is based on the answer result of the subject with respect to the question. This is a response capability evaluation system characterized by evaluating knowledge.

  The invention according to claim 6 is the correspondence ability evaluation system according to claim 5, wherein the correspondence ability evaluation means evaluates the behavior of the subject based on the correspondence situation of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation. It is a corresponding ability evaluation system.

  The invention according to claim 7 is the response capability evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 4, wherein the response capability evaluation means is based on the response status of the subject to the abnormal status. This is a response capability evaluation system characterized by evaluating the behavior of a subject.

  According to an eighth aspect of the present invention, in the response capability evaluation system according to the fifth aspect, the response capability evaluation means is that the subject has encountered the abnormal situation but does not understand the meaning of the abnormal situation. When the perceptual evaluation means evaluates that an appropriate perception could not be made, the subject perceived the abnormal situation but did not understand an appropriate coping method for the abnormal situation. When the judgment / evaluation means evaluates that it was not, or the subject perceives the abnormal situation and makes an appropriate judgment, but does not understand the proper operation method for the abnormal situation, so the appropriate operation cannot be performed. When the operation evaluation means evaluates, the response capacity evaluation system is characterized in that the subject evaluates that the knowledge is insufficient.

  The invention according to claim 9 is the case where the correspondence ability evaluation means in the correspondence ability evaluation system according to claim 6 or claim 7 evaluates that the subject has sufficient knowledge and understanding, When the subject evaluation means evaluated that the subject did not take an appropriate action without perceiving the abnormal situation, the subject perceived the abnormal situation but did not take an appropriate action by mistake. When the judgment / evaluation means evaluates, or when the subject perceives the abnormal situation and makes an appropriate judgment for the abnormal situation, the operation evaluation means evaluates that the operation is erroneously performed and no appropriate action is taken. It is a response capability evaluation system characterized by evaluating that it is insufficient consciousness when it is done.

  The invention according to claim 10 is the correspondence ability evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 9, wherein an appropriate training item is provided to the subject based on the evaluation result of the correspondence ability evaluation means. It is a correspondence ability evaluation system characterized by including an education / training item notification means (22) for notification.

  The invention according to claim 11 is a response capability evaluation program for displaying an abnormal situation on the subject (M) and evaluating the response capability of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation. Perceptual evaluation procedure (S521, S535) for evaluating whether or not the subject has perceived, and a judgment evaluation procedure for evaluating whether or not the subject has determined an appropriate countermeasure to be taken by the subject with respect to the abnormal situation ( S522, S536), an operation evaluation procedure (S523, S537) for evaluating whether or not the subject has performed an appropriate operation for the abnormal situation, the perceptual evaluation procedure, the judgment evaluation procedure, and the operation evaluation. A response capability evaluation procedure (S524, S525, S538, S539) for evaluating the response capability of the subject to the abnormal situation based on the evaluation result in the procedure; The corresponding performance evaluation program executed by a computer (27).

  The invention of claim 12 includes the question notification procedure (S406) for notifying the subject of a question for asking knowledge about the abnormal situation in the response capability evaluation program according to claim 11. It is a capacity evaluation program.

  According to a thirteenth aspect of the present invention, in the response capability evaluation program according to the twelfth aspect, the question notification procedure includes a work content and / or a work necessary for the subject to take an appropriate response to the abnormal situation. It is a correspondence capability evaluation program characterized by including the procedure which notifies the question for asking the basic knowledge about a procedure.

  According to a fourteenth aspect of the present invention, in the response capability evaluation program according to the twelfth or thirteenth aspect, the question notification procedure notifies the subject of the correct answer of the question and the subject regarding the meaning and / or positioning of the correct answer. It is a correspondence ability evaluation program characterized by including the procedure which notifies this test subject of the question for asking an understanding.

  According to a fifteenth aspect of the present invention, in the correspondence ability evaluation program according to any one of the twelfth to fourteenth aspects, the correspondence ability evaluation procedure is performed based on an answer result of the subject to the question. A correspondence capability evaluation program characterized by including a procedure (S524, S525) for evaluating knowledge.

  According to a sixteenth aspect of the present invention, in the correspondence ability evaluation program according to the fifteenth aspect, the correspondence ability evaluation procedure is a procedure for evaluating the behavior of the subject based on the correspondence situation of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation (S538, S539), and a response capability evaluation program.

  The invention according to claim 17 is the correspondence ability evaluation program according to any one of claims 11 to 14, wherein the correspondence ability evaluation procedure is based on a correspondence situation of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation. It is a correspondence ability evaluation program characterized by including the procedure (S538, S539) which evaluates a test subject's action.

  The invention according to claim 18 is the correspondence ability evaluation program according to claim 15, because the correspondence ability evaluation procedure is such that the subject has encountered the abnormal situation but does not understand the meaning of the abnormal situation. Appropriate because the subject perceives the abnormal situation but does not understand the appropriate coping method for the abnormal situation when the perceptual evaluation procedure is evaluated (S521). Although it is evaluated in the judgment evaluation procedure that it cannot be judged (S522), or the subject perceives the abnormal situation and makes an appropriate judgment, but does not understand an appropriate operation method for the abnormal situation. Therefore, when it is evaluated in the operation evaluation procedure that the appropriate operation could not be performed (S523), a procedure (S525) for evaluating that the subject has insufficient knowledge is included. The corresponding performance evaluation program characterized and.

  According to a nineteenth aspect of the present invention, in the correspondence ability evaluation program according to the sixteenth or seventeenth aspect, the correspondence ability evaluation procedure is performed when it is evaluated that the subject has sufficient knowledge and understanding. When the test subject evaluates (S535) that the subject did not take an appropriate action without perceiving the abnormal situation (S535), the subject perceived the abnormal situation but made an incorrect judgment. When it is evaluated in the judgment evaluation procedure that the user has not taken any action (S536), or the subject perceives the abnormal situation and makes an appropriate judgment with respect to the abnormal situation. A response capability evaluation program characterized by including a procedure (S539) for evaluating that the user is not conscious when it is evaluated by the operation evaluation procedure (S537).

  The invention of claim 20 is the correspondence ability evaluation program according to any one of claims 11 to 19, wherein an appropriate training item for the subject is determined based on the evaluation result in the correspondence ability evaluation procedure. It is a correspondence ability evaluation program characterized by including the education training item notification procedure (S630) to notify.

  According to the present invention, it is possible to objectively evaluate a subject's knowledge and behavior with respect to an abnormal situation.

Hereinafter, embodiments of the present invention will be described in detail with reference to the drawings.
FIG. 1 is a configuration diagram of a response capability evaluation system according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 2 is a configuration diagram of the driving training apparatus of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing, as an example, a normal screen displayed by the image display device of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 4 is a diagram showing, as an example, a screen at the time of abnormality displayed by the image display device of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.

  A subject M shown in FIG. 2 is an evaluation subject whose corresponding ability is evaluated by the corresponding ability evaluation system 1 shown in FIG. The subject M is evaluated for the ability to respond to a series of events caused by an abnormal situation, and the knowledge and behavior for each event are evaluated, and appropriate training items are presented according to the evaluation results. The subject M is a driver who operates a railway vehicle, for example.

  The response capability evaluation system 1 shown in FIG. 1 is a system that displays an abnormal situation to the subject M and evaluates the response capability of the subject M with respect to the abnormal situation. The response capability evaluation system 1 reproduces a series of abnormal events caused by an abnormal situation in chronological order, and evaluates the response capability of the subject M for each abnormal event. As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the response capability evaluation system 1 includes an image display device 2, a driving training device 3, a response status detection device 4, a response capability evaluation device 5, and the like. The response capability evaluation system 1 causes the subject M to actually drive by the driving training device 3 in accordance with the image displayed on the image display device 2, detects the driving status of the subject M by the response status detection device 4, and is abnormal. The response capability of the subject M with respect to the situation is improved by the response capability evaluation device 5.

The image display device 2 shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 is a device that displays various image information. For example, as shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, the image display device 2 displays on the screen an image of a route scenery where the railway vehicle actually travels or an image of a route scenery generated by computer graphics for driving training. This is a simulated field of view generator that projects and displays in real time. The image display device 2, for example, as shown in FIG. 3, and one of the line R ₁ in double track the vehicle subject M is driving operation to travel, the vehicle opposite to the vehicle traveling on this line R ₁ is traveling Crossing C ₁ where the other line (adjacent line) R _{2 of} the double line, the road R _{3 on} which the vehicle V runs, the lines R ₁ and R ₂ intersect, and the lines R ₁ and R ₂ on both sides such as crossing breaker C ₂ to cut off the C ₁ by the blocking cans are displayed on the screen 2a. The image display device 2, for example, as shown in FIG. 4, the vehicle V cutoff cans crossings breaker C ₂ is lowered is confined within the crossing C ₁ can not escape from the crossing C within ₁ "captivated ”Is displayed on the screen 2a.

  The driving training device 3 illustrated in FIGS. 1 and 2 is a device that trains the driving operation of the subject M. The driving training device 3 is, for example, a simulated driving device (driving simulation device) that simulates a driver's cab and a master controller (master controller) in a driver's cab of a real railway vehicle. As shown in FIG. 2, the driving training device 3 is a handle 3a that is manually operated when driving the vehicle, a horn switch 3b that is operated when the horn is blown, and a vehicle that stops the vehicle in an emergency. The emergency brake switch 3c that is operated, the pantograph lowering switch 3d that is operated when the pantograph is lowered in an emergency, and the radio that is used to stop a vehicle traveling in the vicinity when an accident occurs are transmitted. A protective radio switch 3e, a signal flame tube ignition switch 3f operated to ignite a signal flame tube (flame cylinder) for stopping a vehicle traveling in the vicinity when an accident occurs, and a screen 2a of the image display device 2 An answer switch 3g for answering the question displayed above is provided.

  The correspondence status detection device 4 shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 is a device that detects the correspondence status of the subject M. For example, as shown in FIG. 2, the response status detection device 4 detects operation statuses of a handle 3a, a horn switch 3b, an emergency brake switch 3c, a pantograph lowering switch 3d, a protective radio switch 3e, a signal flame tube ignition switch 3f, and the like. To do. The response status detection device 4 detects an operation status (response status) when the subject M operates various operation units of the driving training device 3, and outputs the detection result to the response capability evaluation device 5 as response status detection information. To do.

  A response capability evaluation device 5 shown in FIGS. 1 and 2 is a device that evaluates the response capability of the subject M with respect to an abnormal situation. The response capability evaluation apparatus 5 objectively evaluates the response capability of the subject M at the time of abnormality, and notifies the subject M of an optimal training item according to the evaluation result. The response capability evaluation device 5 is constituted by a personal computer, for example, and reads a response capability evaluation program into this personal computer so that it can be easily evaluated using an existing driving simulator. A predetermined process is executed. As shown in FIG. 1, the response capability evaluation device 5 includes a response status information input unit 6, an image information storage unit 7, an image information selection unit 8, an image information reproduction unit 9, a time limit notification unit 10, A time limit information storage unit 11, an elapsed time notification unit 12, an elapsed time measurement unit 13, a response status information storage unit 14, a damage status notification unit 15, a damage status information storage unit 16, and a question notification unit 17; , Question information storage unit 18, answer information storage unit 19, evaluation unit 20, evaluation information storage unit 21, education and training item notification unit 22, education and training information storage unit 23, program reading unit 24, and program A storage unit 25, an interface unit 26, a control unit 27, a communication unit 28, and the like are provided.

  The response status information input unit 6 is a means for inputting response status information from the response status detection device 4. The response status information input unit 6 is an interface (I / O) circuit that connects the response status detection device 4 and the response capability evaluation device 5 and inputs / outputs various information between them. The output correspondence status information is output to the control unit 27.

The image information storage unit 7 is a means for storing various image information for driving training. The image information storage unit 7 includes, for example, image information generated by image processing of an actual route landscape as a course for education and training, image information generated by computer graphics using a virtual route landscape as a course for education and training, and the like. It is a memory to store. The image information storage unit 7 stores, as a simulator scenario, a route scenery when a train travels on a certain route in a normal time and a route landscape when the train travels when the route is abnormal. Image information storage unit 7, for example, crossing such that crossing accident occurred collide with the motor vehicle V, such as heavy-duty trucks has become hooked in the crossings C ₁ shown in FIG. 4, the vehicle V is trouble adjacent line Stores image information at the time of the accident.

  The image information selection unit 8 is means for selecting arbitrary image information from the image information stored in the image information storage unit 7. The image information selection unit 8 is, for example, a touch panel type switch operated when selecting image information to be used when the subject M is trained by the driving training device 3. The image information selection unit 8 is operated when selecting a normal operation mode in which a train travels on a certain route in a normal state and an abnormal operation mode in which the train travels on this route at the time of abnormality.

  The image information reproducing unit 9 is means for reproducing the image information selected by the image information selecting unit 8. The image information reproduction unit 9 is an image reproduction device that reads the image information selected by the image information selection unit 8 from the image information storage unit 7 and reproduces it in real time.

  The time limit notification unit 10 shown in FIG. 1 is means for notifying the time limit for the subject M to take an appropriate response to an abnormal situation. The time limit notification unit 10 notifies the average elapsed time required until the subject M takes an appropriate response to the abnormal situation. The time limit notification unit 10 outputs a time limit to the image display device 2 every time the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation, and displays the time limit on the screen 2a shown in FIG. To do. For example, the time limit notification unit 10 displays an image of the time limit that an average driver must operate the emergency brake and sound a horn from when the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. It is displayed on the device 2.

  The time limit information storage unit 11 shown in FIG. 1 is a means for storing a time limit for the subject M to take an appropriate response to an abnormal situation. The time limit information storage unit 11 is a memory that stores a time limit corresponding to each abnormal situation as time limit information. For example, the time limit information storage unit 11 has a time limit for operating an emergency brake and sounding a horn after an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. The time limit for which the subject M has to lower the pantograph, issue a protection radio, and ignite the signal flame tube after the occurrence of the above is stored.

  The elapsed time notification unit 12 shown in FIG. 1 is a means for notifying the actual elapsed time required for the subject M to take an appropriate response to an abnormal situation. The elapsed time notification unit 12 outputs the elapsed time to the image display device 2 every time the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation, displays the elapsed time on the screen 2a shown in FIG. . For example, the elapsed time notification unit 12 displays on the image display device 2 the elapsed time from when the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 until the subject M operates the emergency brake and rings the horn. Let

  The elapsed time measuring unit 13 shown in FIG. 1 is a means for measuring the actual elapsed time required until the subject M takes an appropriate response to an abnormal situation. The elapsed time measurement unit 13 is a timer that measures an elapsed time after the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation. The elapsed time measurement unit 13 measures the elapsed time every time the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation, and outputs the elapsed time after measurement to the control unit 27 as elapsed time information.

  The response status information storage unit 14 is a means for storing the response status of the subject M with respect to an abnormal status. The response status information storage unit 14 is a memory that stores a response status when the subject M operates and responds to the driving training device 3 for an abnormal status displayed by the image display device 2. For example, the response status information storage unit 14 associates an elapsed time (required time) until the subject M operates the emergency brake switch 3c with respect to each abnormal situation as shown in FIG. I remember it.

The damage status notification unit 15 is a means for notifying the damage status that occurs when the subject M does not take an appropriate response within the time limit. The damage status notifying unit 15 outputs to the image display device 2 the damage status that occurs because the subject M has not taken an appropriate response to the abnormal status displayed by the image display device 2, and this damage status is displayed on the screen 2a. Display above and notify subject M. For example, as shown in FIG. 4, the damage state notification unit 15 responds appropriately to an abnormal situation such as the car V being caught in the crossing C ₁ by operating an emergency brake and sounding a horn. When the subject M does not collide with the vehicle V, the image display apparatus 2 displays the damage situation caused by the collision.

  The damage status information storage unit 16 shown in FIG. 1 is means for storing a damage status that occurs when the subject M does not take an appropriate response within the time limit. The damage situation information storage unit 16 is a memory that stores a damage situation corresponding to each abnormal situation. The damage status information storage unit 16 stores, for example, human damage and / or physical damage that occurs when the subject M does not take an appropriate response to an abnormal situation as damage situation information for each abnormal situation. ing.

  The question notifying unit 17 is a means for notifying a question for asking the subject M about knowledge regarding an abnormal situation. The question notifying unit 17 notifies a question for asking basic knowledge about work contents and / or work procedures necessary for the subject M to take an appropriate response to an abnormal situation. The question notifying unit 17 notifies, for example, the correct answer of the question, and outputs a question for asking the subject M to understand the meaning and / or positioning of the correct answer to the image display device 2, and this question is displayed on the screen 2a. Display and notify subject M. The question notifying unit 17 outputs a question corresponding to each abnormal situation to the image display device 2 when the driving training of the subject M by the driving training device 3 is completed and the image display device 2 displays the abnormal situation again. To do. When the subject M does not answer the question by operating the answer switch 3g during a period from when a certain question is notified until a predetermined answer time elapses, the question notifying unit 17 sends the next question to the image display device 2. Output to.

  The question information storage unit 18 shown in FIG. 1 is means for storing a question for asking knowledge about an abnormal situation. The question information storage unit 18 stores a question corresponding to an abnormal situation displayed by the image display device 2 and a correct answer of the question as question information, and asks the subject M to understand the meaning and positioning of the correct answer. It is a memory for storing a question as question information. The question information storage unit 18 stores, for example, a question for asking the knowledge and behavior of the subject M for an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. In addition, the question item storage unit 18 stores, for example, questions created by dividing into perception, judgment, and reaction according to a human information processing process in order to evaluate the presence or absence of knowledge of the subject M.

  The answer information storage unit 19 shown in FIG. 1 is means for storing the answer result of the subject M with respect to the question notified by the question notifying unit 17. The answer information storage unit 19 is a memory that stores answer results corresponding to each question as answer information. The answer information storage unit 19 stores, for example, YES, NO, or no answer when asking the subject M in a YES / NO format.

FIG. 5 is a configuration diagram of the evaluation unit of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
The evaluation unit 20 evaluates the knowledge of the subject M based on the answer result of the subject M with respect to the question. It is a means to evaluate behavior (consciousness). The evaluation unit 20 evaluates the knowledge of the subject M based on the response information stored in the response information storage unit 19 and evaluates the behavior of the subject M based on the response status information stored in the response status information storage unit 14. The evaluation result is output to the control unit 27 as evaluation information. The evaluation unit 20 evaluates the knowledge and behavior of the subject M divided into situation perception, correspondence determination and operation. As shown in FIG. 5, the evaluation unit 20 includes a response status evaluation unit 20a, a perceptual evaluation unit 20b, a judgment evaluation unit 20c, an operation evaluation unit 20d, a response capability evaluation unit 20e, and the like.

  The response status evaluation unit 20a is a means for evaluating the response status of the subject M with respect to an abnormal status. The response status evaluation unit 20a is based on the response status information stored in the response status information storage unit 14 when the subject M operates the driving training device 3 to respond to an abnormal status displayed by the image display device 2. Evaluate the response status. For example, the response situation evaluation unit 20a evaluates the driving situation of the subject M when the subject M is driven in an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. The perception evaluation unit 20b is a means for evaluating whether or not the subject M perceives an abnormal situation. For example, when an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 occurs, the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates whether or not the subject M is capable of defining (perception) or redefining such an abnormal situation. . The judgment evaluation unit 20c is a means for evaluating whether or not the subject M has determined an appropriate countermeasure to be taken by the subject M with respect to an abnormal situation. The judgment / evaluation unit 20c judges how to deal with and procedures such as emergency brake operation, pantograph lowering, protective radio alarm and signal flame tube ignition, which are appropriate measures for an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. Is evaluated whether or not subject M is possible. The operation evaluation unit 20d is a means for evaluating whether or not the subject M has performed an appropriate operation for an abnormal situation. For example, the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates whether or not the subject M has correctly operated appropriate measures in the correct order for an abnormal situation as illustrated in FIG. The response capability evaluation unit 20e is a means for evaluating the response capability of the subject M with respect to an abnormal situation based on the evaluation results of the perception evaluation unit 20b, the judgment evaluation unit 20c, and the operation evaluation unit 20d. The response capability evaluation unit 20e evaluates, for example, whether or not the subject M is insufficiently conscious and evaluates the behavior of the subject M, and also evaluates whether or not the subject M is insufficiently knowledgeable. Assess your knowledge.

  The evaluation information storage unit 21 is a unit that stores the evaluation result of the evaluation unit 20. The evaluation information storage unit 21 is a memory that stores, as evaluation information, the evaluation result of the corresponding action of the subject M at the time of abnormality when a series of driving simulations is performed by the driving training device 3. The evaluation information storage unit 21 stores evaluation information for each driving simulation.

  The education / training item notification unit 22 is a means for notifying an appropriate training / training item for the subject M based on the evaluation result of the evaluation unit 20. The training / training item notification unit 22 displays the training / training item optimal for the subject M on the image display device 2 based on the evaluation result of the evaluation unit 20 and presents it to the subject M. For example, regarding the definition (perception) of an abnormal situation, the education / training item notification unit 22 is evaluated that the answer to the question notification unit 17 is a correct answer and has knowledge of the corresponding part. When the evaluation unit 20a evaluates and the subjective evaluation evaluates that the failure has occurred in the perceptual part, the perceptual evaluation unit 20b considers that there is knowledge but lacks consciousness, training attention distribution, etc. To be notified. In addition, the education / training item notification unit 22 has been evaluated that the answer to the question notification unit 17 is a correct answer and has knowledge of the corresponding part, for example, regarding the determination of the response to the abnormal state. When the response evaluation unit 20a evaluates and the subjective evaluation evaluates that the failure has occurred in the judgment part, the judgment evaluation unit 20c considers that there is knowledge but lacks consciousness, and is less likely to panic. Notifications such as mental training and immediate judgment practice based on driving safety principles. Furthermore, the education / training item notification unit 22 is evaluated that, for example, a response (behavior) to an abnormal state has a correct answer in the answer information storage unit 19 to the question notification unit 17 and knowledge of the corresponding part However, when there is a failure behavior, the response status evaluation unit 20a evaluates, and when the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the failure has occurred in the operation part by subjective evaluation, there is knowledge but lack of awareness. The image display device 2 displays a repetitive training of skills for thoroughly learning the body.

  The education / training information storage unit 23 is a unit that stores appropriate training / training items according to the knowledge of the subject M and the evaluation result of the behavior. The education / training information storage unit 23 is a memory that stores education / training items corresponding to the evaluation result of the evaluation unit 20 as education / training information. The training information storage unit 23 includes, for example, a training item for attention distribution, a learning program for definitions and specific examples at the time of abnormality, learning for driving safety and an immediate judgment practice item based on the principle, and a countermeasure for each abnormality Learning programs, skill training items, practical skill practice items, operation method learning programs, and the like.

  The program reading unit 24 is a means for reading a response capability evaluation program for displaying an abnormal situation on the subject M and evaluating the response capability of the subject M with respect to the abnormal situation. The program reading unit 24 reads, for example, a corresponding capability evaluation program provided through an electric communication line such as the Internet, or reads a corresponding capability evaluation program recorded on an information recording medium such as a CD-ROM. The program reading unit 24 outputs the corresponding capability evaluation program read from the telecommunication line or the information recording medium to the control unit 27.

  The program storage unit 25 is a means for storing a corresponding ability evaluation program. The program storage unit 25 is a memory that stores a corresponding capability evaluation program fetched through an electric communication line, a corresponding capability evaluation program read from an information recording medium, and the like.

  The interface unit 26 is means for inputting / outputting various information to / from an external device. The interface unit 26 is an interface (I / O) circuit that connects the capability evaluation apparatus 5 and an external apparatus and inputs / outputs various information between them. The interface unit 26 outputs, for example, a question notified by the question notification unit 17 or an education / training item notified by the education / training item notification unit 22 to a printing apparatus or the like.

  The control unit 27 is means (central processing unit (CPU)) for controlling various operations of the corresponding capability evaluation apparatus 5. The control unit 27 reads out the corresponding capability evaluation program from the program storage unit 25 and instructs the corresponding capability evaluation apparatus 5 to execute a predetermined process. For example, the control unit 27 instructs the image information reproduction unit 9 to reproduce the image information, instructs the time limit notification unit 10 to notify the time limit, or instructs the elapsed time notification unit 12 to notify the elapsed time. Command the elapsed time measurement unit 13 to measure elapsed time, command the response status information storage unit 14 to store response status information, command the damage status notification unit 15 to notify the damage status, The notification unit 17 is instructed to notify a question, the response information storage unit 19 is instructed to store response information, the subject M's knowledge and behavior evaluation is instructed to the evaluation unit 20, or the evaluation information storage unit 21 is instructed. The storage of the evaluation information is instructed, or the education / training item notification unit 22 is instructed to notify the education / training item.

  The communication unit 28 is a means for transmitting various information related to the response capability evaluation device 5. The communication unit 28 includes a correspondence status information input unit 6, an image information storage unit 7, an image information selection unit 8, an image information reproduction unit 9, a time limit notification unit 10, a time limit information storage unit 11, an elapsed time notification unit 12, and a progress. Time measurement unit 13, response status information storage unit 14, damage status notification unit 15, damage status information storage unit 16, question notification unit 17, question information storage unit 18, answer information storage unit 19, evaluation unit 20, evaluation information storage unit 21, an education / training item notification unit 22, an education / training information storage unit 23, a program reading unit 24, a program storage unit 25, an interface unit 26, and a control unit 27 so as to communicate with each other.

Next, the operation of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention will be described.
FIG. 6 is a flowchart for explaining the operation of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention. Below, it demonstrates centering around operation | movement of the control part 27 shown in FIG.
In a step (hereinafter referred to as S) 100 shown in FIG. 6, a corresponding ability evaluation program reading process is executed. The control unit 27 shown in FIG. 1 reads the corresponding capability evaluation program from the program storage unit 25 and starts a series of corresponding capability evaluation processes.

  In S200, a normal driving training process is executed. First, the normal driving training process is started by the control unit 27, and the driving training device 3 as shown in FIG. To practice repeatedly in the same line).

  In S300, a driving training process at the time of abnormality is executed. When the normal driving training process is finished, the control unit 27 starts the abnormal driving training process, and uses the driving training apparatus 3 for the second time (substantially the same line) to the subject M as in the normal driving. The operation of the line section (normal number of repeats + 1) is performed.

  In S400, a question notification process is executed. When the abnormal driving training process is completed, the control unit 27 starts a question notification process, and notifies the subject M of a question for asking the subject M about knowledge regarding the abnormal situation.

  In S500, an evaluation process is executed. When the question notification process is completed, the control unit 27 starts an evaluation process, and the knowledge of the subject M is evaluated based on the answer result of the subject M with respect to the question. The behavior of the subject M is evaluated based on the subjective evaluation.

  In S600, an education / training item notification process is executed. When the evaluation process is completed, the control unit 27 starts an education / training item notification process, notifies an appropriate education / training item for the subject M in accordance with the evaluation result, and shows the appropriate ability of the subject M to cope with an abnormal situation. Improve by training items.

FIG. 7 is a flowchart for explaining the corresponding capability evaluation program reading process of the corresponding capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S110 illustrated in FIG. 7, the control unit 27 reads the corresponding capability evaluation program from the program storage unit 25. When the power supply (not shown) is turned on and the corresponding capability evaluation device 5 starts to be activated, the control unit 27 reads the corresponding capability evaluation program from the program storage unit 25.

  In S120, the control unit 27 starts the response capability evaluation process. When the control unit 27 reads out the response capability evaluation program, the control unit 27 starts executing a series of response capability evaluation processes.

FIG. 8 is a flowchart for explaining a normal driving training process of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S210 illustrated in FIG. 8, the control unit 27 reads image information for normal driving training from the image information storage unit 7. When arbitrary image information is selected by the image information selection unit 8 from the image information for normal driving training stored in the image information storage unit 7, the selected image information for normal driving training is displayed as image information. The control unit 27 reads out from the storage unit 7 and outputs it to the image information reproduction unit 9.

  In S220, the control unit 27 instructs the image information reproducing unit 9 to reproduce the image information for normal driving training. As a result, the reproduction of image information for normal driving training is started by the image information reproducing unit 9, and the image display device 2 displays the track scenery of the course for normal driving training as shown in FIG. The subject M starts driving operation of the driving training apparatus 3 according to the track scenery.

FIG. 9 is a flowchart for explaining the driving training process at the time of abnormality of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S310 shown in FIG. 9, the control unit 27 reads out image information for driving training at the time of abnormality from the image information storage unit 7. For example, the control unit 27 reads out image information for driving training at the time of abnormality including image information of an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 from the image information storage unit 7 and outputs it to the image information reproduction unit 9.

  In S320, the control unit 27 instructs the image information reproducing unit 9 to reproduce the image information for driving training at the time of abnormality. As a result, the image information reproducing unit 9 starts reproducing the image information for driving training at the time of abnormality, and the image display device 2 displays the screen scenery of the course for driving training at the time of abnormality as shown in FIG. The subject M starts driving operation of the driving training apparatus 3 according to the track scenery.

  In S330, the control unit 27 determines whether or not an abnormal situation has been reproduced. The control unit 27 determines whether or not an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 is displayed on the image display device 2 based on the reproduction operation of the image information reproduction unit 9, and the image information reproduction unit 9 reproduces the abnormal situation. If YES in step S340, the process advances to step S340. If the image information reproducing unit 9 does not reproduce an abnormal situation, the determination is repeated until the abnormal situation is reproduced.

In S340, the control unit 27 instructs the elapsed time measurement unit 13 to measure the elapsed time. When the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation, the control unit 27 instructs the elapsed time measurement unit 13 to measure the elapsed time, and the elapsed time measurement unit 13 starts measuring the elapsed time to control the elapsed time information. 27. As a result, for example, as shown in FIG. 4, curve speed 72km / h in an abnormal situation such as an automobile V is gripped during traveling within this crossing C ₁ in front 700m of crossing C ₁ is an image display device 2 is displayed on the second screen 2a, and the elapsed time measuring unit 13 measures the elapsed time after the abnormal situation is displayed.

  In S350, the control unit 27 determines whether or not the time limit has elapsed. Based on the time limit information stored in the time limit information storage unit 11 and the elapsed time information output from the elapsed time measurement unit 13, the control unit 27 determines whether or not the elapsed time exceeds the time limit. When the control unit 27 determines that the elapsed time exceeds the time limit, the process proceeds to S360. When the control unit 27 determines that the elapsed time does not exceed the time limit, the determination of S350 is performed until the elapsed time exceeds the time limit. repeat. For example, when the subject M operates the driving training device 3 and takes an appropriate response within the time limit for an abnormal situation, the response status detection device 4 detects the response status of the subject M. As a result, the response status information is input from the response status detection device 4 to the control unit 27 through the response status information input unit 6, and the control unit 27 outputs the response status information to the response status information storage unit 14. Is stored in the correspondence status information storage unit 14.

  In S360, the control unit 27 instructs the response status evaluation unit 20a to evaluate the response status of the subject M. The control unit 27 reads out the response status information from the response status information storage unit 14 and outputs the response status information to the response status evaluation unit 20a. Based on this response status information, an evaluation is made as to whether or not the subject M has taken an appropriate response within the time limit. The control unit 27 commands the response status evaluation unit 20a. For example, when the subject M operates the emergency brake switch 3c and operates the horn switch 3b within the time limit after an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 is displayed on the screen 2a of the image display device 2, the time is not exceeded. The response status evaluation unit 20a evaluates that the subject M took an appropriate response.

  In S370, the control unit 27 instructs the evaluation information storage unit 21 to store the evaluation result. An evaluation result indicating whether or not the subject M took an appropriate response within the time limit is input from the response status evaluation unit 20a to the control unit 27, and the evaluation result is output from the control unit 27 to the evaluation information storage unit 21. This evaluation result is stored in the evaluation information storage unit 21 as evaluation information.

In S380, the control unit 27 determines whether or not the next abnormal situation has been reproduced. When the subject M does not appropriately respond to the first abnormal situation, the control unit determines whether or not the next abnormal situation is displayed on the image display device 2 based on the reproduction operation of the image information reproduction unit 9. 27 determines. When the image information reproducing unit 9 reproduces the next abnormal situation, the process returns to S330, and the processes after S330 are repeated until the operation of the train is resumed. On the other hand, when the image information reproducing section 9 does not reproduce the next abnormal situation, the series of abnormal driving training processing is terminated. For example, when the subject M does not take an appropriate response to the abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4, the next abnormal situation in which the automobile V collides and rolls over and interferes with the line R ₂ is caused. The situation is replayed.

FIG. 10 is a flowchart for explaining the question notification process of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 11 is a diagram illustrating an example of a question displayed by the image display device of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S401 illustrated in FIG. 10, the control unit 27 reads out image information for driving training at the time of abnormality from the image information storage unit 7. The control unit 27 reads out the image information used in the driving training process at the time of abnormality in S300 from the image information storage unit 7 and outputs it to the image information reproduction unit 9.

  In S <b> 402, the control unit 27 instructs the image information reproduction unit 9 to reproduce an image in an abnormal state among the image information for driving training at the time of abnormality. For example, from the image information read out from the image information storage unit 7 in S 401, the control unit 27 extracts an image in an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 and outputs this image information to the image information reproduction unit 9. As a result, the image in such an abnormal situation is reproduced as a still image by the image information reproducing unit 9 and displayed on the screen 2a by the image display device 2.

In S403, the control unit 27 instructs the time limit notification unit 10 to notify the time limit. When the image display device 2 displays an abnormal situation, the control unit 27 reads the time limit information corresponding to the abnormal situation from the time limit information storage unit 11 and outputs the time limit information to the time limit notification unit 10. The control unit 27 instructs the time limit notification unit 10 to notify the time limit. As a result, for example, as shown in FIG. 4, curve speed 72km / h in an abnormal situation such as an automobile V is gripped during traveling within this crossing C ₁ in front 700m of crossing C ₁ is an image display device 2 is displayed on the screen 2a, and a time limit 5 seconds that the subject M must take an appropriate response to this abnormal situation is displayed (time pressure display). Here, the time limit is, for example, the difference between the current time and the scheduled arrival time at the next station is displayed until an abnormal situation occurs. Switch to display seconds. For example, if the seizure occurs at 620m before level crossing C1, _first the time limit for 1 second until the brake is displayed (minus display is also possible). Displays the time limit of 5 seconds for measures such as signal flame ignition.

  In S404, the control unit 27 instructs the elapsed time notification unit 12 to notify the elapsed time. The actual elapsed time (required time) required for the subject M to take an appropriate response to the abnormal situation is read from the response status information storage unit 14 by the control unit 27 and output to the elapsed time notification unit 12. The control unit 27 instructs the elapsed time notification unit 12 to notify the time. As a result, for example, the actual progress required from the time when the abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 is displayed on the screen 2a of the image display device 2 until the subject M takes an appropriate response to this abnormal situation. Time 1 second is displayed on this screen 2a (time pressure display).

In S405, the control unit 27 instructs the damage status notification unit 15 to notify the damage status. When the subject M does not take an appropriate response to the abnormal situation, the control unit 27 reads out the damage situation information corresponding to the abnormal situation from the damage situation information storage unit 16 and sends it to the damage situation notification unit 15. While outputting the damage status information, the control unit 27 instructs the damage status notification unit 15 to notify the damage status. As a result, for example, is displayed human damage 0 people damage situation when the subject M operates the emergency brake switch 3c immediately in front 620m crossings C ₁ shown in FIG. 4, the subject M in front 600m crossings C ₁ There appears a human suffering 1 people damage situation when operating the emergency brake switch 3c with a delay of one second, the damage situation is when operating the emergency brake switch 3c delayed subject M is more than 5 seconds before 520m crossings C ₁ Is displayed as 10 human casualties. For example, when an abnormal situation such as a line R ₂ shown in FIG. 4 is an automobile V to trouble occurs, human damage 0 people damage situation when the subject M has taken appropriate measures exactly routings When the subject M does not operate the pantograph lowering switch 3d, the damage status is displayed as one human injury, and when the subject M does not operate the protective radio switch 3e, the damage status is 40 human injury. When the subject M does not operate the signal flame tube ignition switch 3f, the damage status is displayed as 50 human damages.

  In S406, the control unit 27 instructs the question notification unit 17 to notify the question. As a result, a question for evaluating the knowledge of the subject M for a certain abnormal situation is displayed on the screen 2a of the image display device 2. For example, an image of an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 11 is displayed, and “Please select YES if the following document is correct in such an abnormal situation, or NO if it is incorrect”, “Question 1 : The emergency brake is applied after sounding the whistle. (YES / NO) "is displayed on the screen 2a. Further, for example, after the question 1, the image display device 2 displays on the screen 2a, “Question 2: The whistle that informs the train approach is a short whistle whistles (YES / NO)”. Furthermore, for the subject M whose operation of the emergency brake switch 3c was delayed due to an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4, "Question 3: The brake operation is delayed by 2 seconds in a train traveling at a speed of 72 km / h." The train will travel 40m. (YES / NO) "and the image display device 2 displays on the screen 2a.

  In S407, the control unit 27 instructs the response information storage unit 19 to store the response result. When the subject M operates the answer switch 3g to answer the question, the control unit 27 determines whether the answer result is YES, NO, or no answer, and the control unit 27 determines the answer information. The control unit 27 instructs the response information storage unit 19 to store the response information. As a result, the answer information corresponding to each question is stored in the answer information storage unit 19.

  In step S <b> 408, the control unit 27 instructs the question notification unit 17 to notify the correct answer. As a result, the control unit 27 reads out the correct answer of the question from the question information storage unit 18 and outputs it to the question notification unit 17, and instructs the question notification unit 17 to notify the correct answer. As a result, the answer to the question is displayed on the screen 2a of the image display device 2.

  In S409, the control unit 27 determines whether or not to ask the meaning and positioning of the correct answer. Based on the question information read from the question information storage unit 18, the control unit 27 determines whether or not it is necessary to ask the subject M about the meaning and position of the correct answer of the question. When the control unit 27 determines that it is necessary to ask the subject M about the meaning and positioning of the correct answer of the question, the process returns to S406, and the question notifying unit sends a question for asking the subject M about the meaning and positioning of the correct answer of the question. The control unit 27 instructs 17 to repeat the processing from S406. On the other hand, when the control unit 27 determines that there is no need to ask the subject M about the meaning and positioning of the correct answer of the question, the process proceeds to S410.

In S410, the control unit 27 determines whether there is an image of the next abnormal situation. In S401, the control unit 27 determines whether or not there is an image of the next abnormal situation in the image information read from the image information storage unit 7, and if there is an image of the next abnormal situation, the process proceeds to S406. When the next abnormal situation image does not exist, the series of question notification processing ends. For example, from the image information read from the image information storing unit 7 in S401, collides with the vehicle V to the next image of the abnormal situation such as this vehicle V is casualties the line R ₂ overturned crossings C ₁ When the control unit 27 extracts the image, the image display device 2 displays the next abnormal image on the screen 2a. Also, for example, “Question 4: What should be done immediately after a train collision and before contacting the conductor or driving command is to get off the train if a protective radio alarm is issued and the flame flame is ignited (YES / The image display device 2 displays the next question such as “NO)” on the screen 2a.

FIG. 12 is a flowchart for explaining an evaluation process of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S510 shown in FIG. 12, the control unit 27 reads the response status information from the response status information storage unit 14, and the control unit 27 reads the response information from the response information storage unit 19. As a result, correspondence status information and answer information are output from the control unit 27 to the evaluation unit 20.

  In S520, knowledge evaluation processing is executed. The control unit 27 instructs the evaluation unit 20 to execute a knowledge evaluation process for evaluating the knowledge of the subject M based on the answer result of the subject M with respect to the question. As a result, the evaluation unit 20 starts a series of knowledge evaluation processes.

  In S530, an action evaluation process is executed. The control unit 27 instructs the evaluation unit 20 to execute a behavior evaluation process for evaluating the behavior (consciousness) of the subject M based on the response status of the subject M with respect to the abnormal situation. As a result, the evaluation unit 20 starts a series of behavior evaluation processes.

  In S540, the control unit 27 instructs the evaluation information storage unit 21 to store the evaluation result. When the evaluation unit 20 outputs the evaluation information to the control unit 27, the control unit 27 outputs the evaluation information to the evaluation information storage unit 21 and instructs the evaluation information storage unit 21 to store the evaluation result. Stores the evaluation information.

FIG. 13 is a flowchart for explaining the knowledge evaluation process of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S521 shown in FIG. 13, the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates whether or not the meaning of the abnormality was known. Although the subject M has encountered an abnormal situation, the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates whether or not the meaning of the abnormal situation is understood. For example, when the subject M notices an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 and judges from the answer result to the question, an error occurs without knowing the anomaly (problem) that the abnormal situation means. The perception evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M has insufficient knowledge regarding the definition (perception) of the situation. When the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M knew the meaning of the abnormality, the process proceeds to S522, and when the perception evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M did not know the meaning of the abnormality, the process proceeds to S525.

  In S522, the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates whether or not the subject M knew an appropriate coping method. Although the subject M perceives an abnormal situation, the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates whether or not he / she understands an appropriate coping method for the abnormal event. For example, when the subject M has noticed an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 and has made an error without knowing an appropriate coping method when judging from the answer result to the question, knowledge about the judgment corresponding to the subject M Judgment evaluation part 20c evaluates that it is insufficient. When the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates that the subject M does not know the appropriate coping method, the process proceeds to S525, and when the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates that the subject M knows the appropriate coping method, the process proceeds to S523.

  In S523, the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates whether or not the subject M did not know the operation method. The subject M perceives an abnormal situation and makes an appropriate judgment. The operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates whether or not the subject M understands an appropriate operation method for the abnormal situation. For example, when the subject M makes an error without knowing the operation method based on the answer to the question, the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the subject M has insufficient knowledge about the operation. When the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the subject M does not know the operation method, the process proceeds to S525, and when the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the subject M knows the operation method, the process proceeds to S524.

  In S524, the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M has knowledge. As a result, the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M has sufficient knowledge from the answer result, and the evaluation information is output to the control unit 27, and the evaluation information storage unit 21 stores the evaluation information. To

  In S525, the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M has insufficient knowledge. As a result, the response capability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the knowledge of the subject M is insufficient from the answer result, the evaluation information is output to the control unit 27, and the control unit 27 stores the evaluation information. Command to 21.

FIG. 14 is a flowchart for explaining the action evaluation process of the correspondence evaluation training system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S531 illustrated in FIG. 14, the response capability evaluation unit 20e determines whether or not the subject M has knowledge and understanding. Not only when the subject M has knowledge and takes an appropriate response to the abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4, but the subject M has an accurate knowledge and cannot take an appropriate response. In some cases. For this reason, even if the subject M has knowledge, when the appropriate response cannot be performed, it is necessary to further evaluate the behavioral awareness. For this reason, the control unit 27 reads the evaluation information from the evaluation information storage unit 21 and determines whether or not the subject M has knowledge and understanding based on the knowledge evaluation result in S524 and S525 shown in FIG. 20e determines. As a result, in the knowledge evaluation process of S520, when the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M has sufficient knowledge and understanding, the process proceeds to S533, and the subject M does not have sufficient knowledge and understanding. When the ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates, the process proceeds to S532.

  In S532, the response capability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M has insufficient knowledge. As a result, the subject M has insufficient knowledge based on the response status, and thus the process proceeds to S540 without executing the action evaluation process.

  In S533, the response capability evaluation unit 20e determines whether or not the subject M has succeeded in the coping behavior. The control unit 27 reads the evaluation information from the evaluation information storage unit 21, and the control unit 27 outputs this evaluation information to the corresponding capability evaluation unit 20e. As a result, whether or not the subject M has taken an appropriate response based on the evaluation result of the response status of the test subject M evaluated by the response status evaluation unit 20a in the abnormal driving training process S300 shown in FIGS. Is evaluated by the response capability evaluation unit 20e. When subject M has knowledge but failed without taking appropriate action, he presented a new question to subject M, and subject M's subjective evaluation failed due to inappropriate classification of perception, judgment or operation It is necessary to analyze and evaluate. When the subject M has not taken an appropriate response, the process proceeds to S535, and when the subject M has taken an appropriate action, the process proceeds to S534.

  In S534, the response capability evaluation unit 20e determines that the response capability when the subject M is abnormal is good. As a result, the subject M's ability to deal with is good from the situation of correspondence, so the process proceeds to S540 without executing the action evaluation process.

  In S535, the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates whether or not the subject M has noticed an abnormal situation. The perception evaluation unit 20b evaluates whether or not the subject M did not take an appropriate action without perceiving an abnormal situation. When the control unit 27 reads a question for evaluating whether or not the perception of the subject M is inappropriate from the question item storage unit 11 and instructs the question item notification unit 17 to notify the question, the image display device 2 A question is displayed on the screen 2a, and the subject M answers the question subjectively. As a result, for example, when the subject M is not aware of the abnormal situation (problem) as shown in FIG. The perception evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the awareness for redefinition or perception is insufficient. When the sensory evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M has noticed an abnormal situation, the process proceeds to S536, and when the sensory evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M has not noticed an abnormal situation, the process proceeds to S539.

  In S536, the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates whether or not the subject M has made a mistake. Judgment evaluation part 20c evaluates whether subject M perceived an abnormal situation but made a mistake. A question for evaluating whether or not the judgment of the subject M is inappropriate is displayed on the screen 2a of the image display device 2, and the subject M answers the question subjectively. As a result, for example, when the subject M notices an abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4 and an error occurs due to misbehavior, inability to retrieve the memory, or judgment stoppage, the subject M is conscious of the corresponding judgment. Judgment evaluation part 20c evaluates that it is insufficient. When the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates that the subject M has made a judgment error, the process proceeds to S539, and when the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates that the subject M has not made a judgment, the process proceeds to S537.

  In S537, the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates whether or not the subject M has made an operation error. The subject evaluation unit 20d evaluates whether or not the subject M perceived an abnormal situation and made an appropriate determination with respect to the abnormal situation, but did not perform an appropriate action by mistake. A question for evaluating whether or not the operation of the subject M is inappropriate is displayed on the screen 2a of the image display device 2, and the subject M answers the question subjectively. As a result, for example, when the subject M makes an appropriate judgment for the abnormal situation as shown in FIG. 4, but the operation is erroneously caused by a decrease in precision or reflex behavior, the subject M The operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that M is not conscious of the operation. When the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the subject M has made an operation error, the process proceeds to S539, and when the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the subject M has made no operation error, the process proceeds to S538.

  In S538, the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M is conscious. As a result, the response situation for the abnormal time was inappropriate, but the knowledge is sufficient, and subjectively, the subject M is sufficiently aware of the abnormal situation. For this reason, the response capability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the abnormal response capability from both the knowledge and consciousness points cannot be evaluated although there is subjective awareness. When the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M is sufficiently aware of the abnormal situation from the response situation, the evaluation information is output to the control unit 27, and the control unit 27 stores the evaluation information. Command to unit 21.

  In S539, the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M is not conscious. As a result, the subject M has a part where the behavior (consciousness) and the knowledge are different, and the response ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the subject M is insufficiently aware of the abnormal situation from the correspondence situation, The evaluation information is output to the control unit 27 and the control unit 27 instructs the evaluation information storage unit 21 to store the evaluation information.

FIG. 15 is a flowchart for explaining an education / training item notification process of the response capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention.
In S610 illustrated in FIG. 15, the control unit 27 reads the evaluation information from the evaluation information storage unit 21.

  In S620, the control unit 27 searches the education and training information storage unit 23. Based on the evaluation information, the control unit 27 searches the education / training information storage unit 23 and selects the most appropriate training item for the subject M. For example, in the knowledge evaluation process of S520, when the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M has encountered an abnormal situation but did not know the meaning of the abnormal situation, the definition of the abnormality and a learning program of a specific example Is selected as an education and training item, and when the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates that the subject M perceives an abnormality but does not know an appropriate coping method, a learning program of the coping method at the time of the abnormality is selected as an education and training item, When the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the subject M did not know the operation method, the practical skill practice and learning program for the operation method are selected as the training items. Also, in the behavior evaluation process of S530, when the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M has not noticed an abnormality, the attention distribution ability training is selected as an educational training item, and the subject M has noticed an abnormality, but the determination is incorrect. When the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates, mental training training that makes it difficult to panic and immediate judgment practice based on the principle of driving safety are selected as the training items, and the subject M makes an appropriate judgment. When the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that the operation is wrong, skill training is selected as an education / training item.

  In S630, the control unit 27 instructs the education / training item notification unit 22 to notify the education / training item. The control unit 27 outputs the education / training information optimal for the subject M to the education / training item notification unit 22, and instructs the education / training item notification unit 22 to notify the education / training information. As a result, an education / training item is displayed on the screen 2a of the image display device 2, and the subject M receives education and training according to the education / training item. Moreover, the control part 27 outputs the education / training information most suitable for the subject M to the interface part 26 as needed, and the education / training item is printed by the printing apparatus.

The capability evaluation system according to the embodiment of the present invention has the following effects.
(1) In this embodiment, the perception evaluation unit 20b evaluates whether or not the subject M perceives an abnormal situation, and the subject M takes an appropriate countermeasure to be taken by the subject M with respect to the abnormal situation. The judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates whether or not it has been judged, and the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates whether or not the subject M has performed an appropriate operation for this abnormal situation, and the perceptual evaluation unit 20b and the judgment evaluation unit 20c. Based on the evaluation result of the operation evaluation unit 20d, the response capability evaluation unit 20e evaluates the response capability of the subject M with respect to the abnormal situation. For this reason, it is possible to objectively determine the subject M's ability to cope with an abnormal situation in three stages of perception, judgment and operation.

(2) In this embodiment, the question notifying unit 17 notifies a question for asking the subject M about knowledge regarding an abnormal situation. For this reason, it is possible to ask the subject M's understanding of the knowledge and the awareness of the behavior regarding an abnormal situation.

(3) In this embodiment, the question notifying unit 17 notifies a question for asking basic knowledge about work contents and / or work procedures necessary for the subject M to take an appropriate response to an abnormal situation. To do. For this reason, it is possible to ask the subject M's understanding of knowledge and consciousness of behavior more accurately.

(4) In this embodiment, while notifying the correct answer of the question, the question notifying unit 17 notifies the question for asking the subject M to understand the meaning and / or positioning of the correct answer. For this reason, the subject's M understanding can be improved further.

(5) In this embodiment, the correspondence ability evaluation unit 20e evaluates the knowledge of the subject M based on the answer result of the subject M to the question. In this embodiment, the response capability evaluation unit 20e evaluates the behavior of the subject based on the response status of the subject M with respect to the abnormal situation. For this reason, the knowledge and action of the subject M can be objectively evaluated, unlike the case where the instructor like the conventional hands-on training is subjectively evaluated.

(6) In this embodiment, when the perceptual evaluation unit 20b evaluates that the subject M has encountered an abnormal situation but has not understood the meaning of the abnormal situation and has not been able to perceive properly, the subject M Perceives an abnormal situation but does not understand an appropriate coping method for the abnormal situation, so that the judgment evaluation unit 20c evaluates that an appropriate judgment cannot be made, or the subject M perceives an abnormal situation. However, when the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that an appropriate operation could not be performed because it did not understand an appropriate operation method for this abnormal situation, but the response evaluation unit 20e has insufficient knowledge. evaluate. For this reason, the subject's M understanding of the knowledge side can be objectively and accurately evaluated.

(7) In this embodiment, when it is evaluated that the subject M has sufficient knowledge and understanding, the subject evaluation unit 20b indicates that the subject M did not take an appropriate action without perceiving an abnormal situation. When the evaluation and evaluation unit 20c evaluates that the subject M perceived an abnormal situation but did not make an appropriate action by mistake, or the subject M perceives an abnormal situation and enters this abnormal situation. On the other hand, when the operation evaluation unit 20d evaluates that an appropriate determination has been made but an appropriate operation has not been performed by mistake, the response capability evaluation unit 20e evaluates that the consciousness is insufficient. For this reason, it is possible to objectively and accurately evaluate the behavioral consciousness of the subject M.

(8) In this embodiment, the education / training item notification unit 22 notifies the education / training item suitable for the subject M based on the evaluation result of the response capability evaluation unit 20e. For this reason, the optimal training item according to the weak point of the subject M can be presented, and the subject M's ability to cope with an abnormal situation can be further improved.

The present invention is not limited to the embodiment described above, and various modifications or changes can be made as described below, and these are also within the scope of the present invention.
(1) In this embodiment, the driving training of the railway vehicle has been described as an example. However, the present invention can also be applied to driving training of other transportation facilities such as automobiles, ships, and aircrafts other than railways. . Further, in this embodiment, the explanation has been given by taking a railway driver as an example, but the present invention is also applied to training of a railway conductor or station staff, training of an operator who operates equipment such as a plant, etc. Can do.

(2) Although this embodiment has been described by taking an example of a situation that is obscured as an abnormal situation, it is not limited to such a situation. For example, the present invention can also be applied to an abnormal situation such as a trouble of the track R ₂ due to a fallen tree or an abnormal sway during train operation. In this embodiment, the driving training apparatus 3 has been described as an example. However, the present invention can also be applied to a case where the tension and presence of a user such as a game machine is improved. Furthermore, in this embodiment, the time limit, elapsed time, damage situation, question, and training item are notified to the subject M by an image, but these can also be notified to the subject M by voice.

(3) In this embodiment, the case where the evaluation unit 20 evaluates the knowledge and behavior of the subject M has been described as an example. However, only one of the behavior or knowledge of the subject M can be evaluated. In this embodiment, the time limit, the elapsed time, and the damage status are displayed in the question notification process S400, but the training item is subject to the subject M who is evaluated subjectively as insufficiently conscious in the behavior evaluation process S530. In the notification process S600, the time limit, elapsed time, and damage status can be displayed.

(4) In this embodiment, the case where the response capability evaluation system 1 is configured by the image display device 2, the driving training device 3, the response status detection device 4, and the response capability evaluation device 5 has been described as an example. The apparatus can also be constituted by a single personal computer. Further, in this embodiment, the case where the damage status notification unit 15 notifies human damage or the like has been described as an example, but the degree of damage is numerically notified, the amount of damage is notified, Notification can be made at a stage such as moderate or mild, a decrease in the number of points can be notified, and the number of minor injuries, the number of serious injuries and the number of deaths can be notified. For example, it can be notified that the degree of disability becomes heavier and the number of injuries increases with the passage of time (delay of recovery) and the error of the subject M.

It is a block diagram of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a block diagram of the driving training apparatus of the corresponding ability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows the screen of the normal time which the image display apparatus of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention displays as an example. It is a figure which shows as an example the screen at the time of abnormality which the image display apparatus of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention displays. It is a block diagram of the evaluation part of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating operation | movement of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the corresponding capability evaluation program read process of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the driving training process of the normal time of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the driving training process at the time of abnormality of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the question notification process of the corresponding ability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a figure which shows the question which the image display apparatus of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention displays as an example. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the evaluation process of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the knowledge evaluation process of the corresponding capability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the action evaluation process of the corresponding ability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention. It is a flowchart for demonstrating the education training item notification process of the corresponding ability evaluation system which concerns on embodiment of this invention.

Explanation of symbols

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Correspondence capacity evaluation system 2 Image display apparatus 3 Driving training apparatus 4 Correspondence situation detection apparatus 5 Correspondence capacity evaluation apparatus 10 Time limit notification part 12 Elapsed time notification part 15 Damage condition notification part 17 Question notification part 20 Evaluation part 20a Correspondence condition evaluation part 20b Perception evaluation unit 20c Judgment evaluation unit 20d Operation evaluation unit 20e Correspondence ability evaluation unit 22 Educational training item notification unit 27 Control unit M Subject

Claims (20)

A response capability evaluation system for displaying an abnormal situation to a subject and evaluating the response capability of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation,
Perceptual evaluation means for evaluating whether or not the subject perceives the abnormal situation;
A judgment evaluation means for evaluating whether or not the subject has judged an appropriate countermeasure to be taken by the subject with respect to the abnormal situation;
Operation evaluating means for evaluating whether or not the subject has performed an appropriate operation for the abnormal situation;
Based on the evaluation results of the perceptual evaluation means, the judgment evaluation means, and the operation evaluation means, the corresponding ability evaluation means for evaluating the subject's ability to cope with the abnormal situation;
Correspondence ability evaluation system with. In the corresponding capability evaluation system according to claim 1,
Comprising question notifying means for notifying a question for asking the subject about knowledge regarding the abnormal situation;
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the correspondence capacity evaluation system according to claim 2,
The question notifying means notifying a question for asking basic knowledge about work contents and / or work procedures necessary for the subject to take an appropriate response to the abnormal situation;
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the corresponding capability evaluation system according to claim 3,
The question notifying means notifying a correct answer of the question, and notifying a question to ask the subject for understanding regarding the meaning and / or positioning of the correct answer;
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the correspondence capacity evaluation system according to any one of claims 2 to 4,
The response capability evaluation means evaluates the subject's knowledge based on the answer result of the subject to the question.
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the corresponding capability evaluation system according to claim 5,
The response capability evaluation means evaluates the behavior of the subject based on the response status of the subject to the abnormal status;
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the corresponding capability evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 4,
The response capability evaluation means evaluates the behavior of the subject based on the response status of the subject to the abnormal status;
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the corresponding capability evaluation system according to claim 5,
When the perceptual evaluation means evaluates that the perceived ability evaluation means evaluates that the subject has encountered the abnormal situation but does not understand the meaning of the abnormal situation but cannot properly perceive, Perceives the abnormal situation but does not understand an appropriate coping method for the abnormal situation, but the judgment evaluation means evaluates that the judgment cannot be made properly, or the subject is in the abnormal situation. When the operation evaluation means evaluates that the appropriate operation cannot be performed because the user does not understand the appropriate operation method for this abnormal situation, the subject evaluates that the subject is insufficient in knowledge. thing,
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the corresponding capability evaluation system according to claim 6 or 7,
The response capability evaluation means is a case where it is evaluated that the subject has sufficient knowledge and understanding, and the subject evaluation means that the subject did not take an appropriate action without perceiving the abnormal situation. When the evaluation means evaluates that the subject perceived the abnormal situation but did not make an appropriate action by mistake, or when the subject perceived the abnormal situation When the operation evaluation means evaluates that the user has made an appropriate judgment for a situation but did not perform an appropriate action by mistake, an evaluation that the subject is insufficiently conscious,
A response capability evaluation system characterized by In the corresponding capability evaluation system according to any one of claims 1 to 9,
Providing an education / training item notification means for notifying an appropriate training / training item for the subject based on the evaluation result of the response capability evaluation means;
A response capability evaluation system characterized by A response capability evaluation program for displaying an abnormal situation to a subject and evaluating the response capability of the subject to the abnormal situation,
A perceptual evaluation procedure for evaluating whether the subject perceived the abnormal situation;
A judgment evaluation procedure for evaluating whether or not the subject has determined an appropriate countermeasure to be taken by the subject against the abnormal situation;
An operation evaluation procedure for evaluating whether or not the subject has performed an appropriate operation for the abnormal situation;
Based on the evaluation results in the perceptual evaluation procedure, the judgment evaluation procedure and the operation evaluation procedure, a response capability evaluation procedure for evaluating the response capability of the subject with respect to the abnormal situation;
A program for evaluating the ability to run a computer. In the correspondence capability evaluation program according to claim 11,
Including a question notification procedure for notifying a question for asking the subject about knowledge regarding the abnormal situation;
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the correspondence capacity evaluation program according to claim 12,
The question notification procedure includes a procedure for notifying a question for asking basic knowledge about work contents and / or work procedures necessary for the subject to take an appropriate response to the abnormal situation.
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the corresponding ability evaluation program according to claim 12 or claim 13,
The question notification procedure includes a procedure for notifying a correct answer of the question and notifying a question for understanding the subject regarding the meaning and / or positioning of the correct answer,
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the correspondence capability evaluation program according to any one of claims 12 to 14,
The response ability evaluation procedure includes a procedure of evaluating the knowledge of the subject based on the answer result of the subject to the question.
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the correspondence capability evaluation program according to claim 15,
The response capability evaluation procedure includes a procedure for evaluating the behavior of the subject based on the response status of the subject with respect to the abnormal status.
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the correspondence capacity evaluation program according to any one of claims 11 to 14,
The response capability evaluation procedure includes a procedure for evaluating the behavior of the subject based on the response status of the subject with respect to the abnormal status.
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the correspondence capability evaluation program according to claim 15,
The response evaluation procedure is such that when the subject encounters the abnormal situation but does not understand the meaning of the abnormal situation, the perceptual evaluation procedure evaluates that the subject cannot properly perceive. When the subject perceives the abnormal situation but does not understand an appropriate coping method for the abnormal situation and cannot make an appropriate judgment by the judgment evaluation procedure, or when the subject has the abnormality When the operation evaluation procedure evaluated that the user could not perform an appropriate operation because the user did not understand an appropriate operation method for the abnormal situation but perceived an appropriate situation, the subject was not knowledgeable. Including a procedure to evaluate
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the correspondence capability evaluation program according to claim 16 or claim 17,
The response evaluation procedure is a case where it is evaluated that the subject has sufficient knowledge and understanding, and that the subject does not take an appropriate action without perceiving the abnormal situation. When evaluated by the procedure, when the test subject evaluates that the subject perceived the abnormal situation but did not make an appropriate action by mistake, or when the subject perceived the abnormal situation Including a procedure for evaluating that there is insufficient consciousness when it is evaluated by the operation evaluation procedure that an appropriate determination is made for this abnormal situation but the operation is not performed by mistake.
A response capability evaluation program characterized by In the correspondence capability evaluation program according to any one of claims 11 to 19,
Including an education / training item notification procedure for notifying an appropriate training / training item for the subject based on the evaluation result in the response capability evaluation procedure;
A response capability evaluation program characterized by

Images