Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Classification of air traffic control scenarios using decision trees: insights from a field study in terminal approach radar environment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Air traffic controllers are responsible for the safe, expeditious and orderly flow of the air traffic. Their training relies heavily on the use of simulators that can represent various normal and emergency situations. Accurate classification of air traffic scenarios can provide assistance towards a better understanding of how controllers respond to the complexity of a traffic scenario. To this end, we conducted a field study using qualified air traffic controllers, who participated in simulator sessions of terminal radar approach control in a variety of scenarios. The aim of the study was twofold, firstly to explore how decision trees and classification rules can be used for realistic classification of air traffic scenarios and secondly to explore which factors reflect better operational complexity. We applied machine learning methods to the data and developed decision trees and classification rules for these scenarios. Results indicated that decision trees and classification rules are useful tools in accurately categorizing scenarios and that complexity requires a larger set of predictors beyond simple aircraft counts. The derived decision trees and classification rules performed well in prediction, stability and interpretability. Practical benefits can be derived in the areas of operations and system design in the context of air traffic flow and capacity management systems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alpaydın E (2014) Introduction to machine learning, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Arranz A, Ciruelos C, Etxebarria I, Peces S, Campanelli B, Fleurquin P, Eguiluz VM, Ramasco JJ (2015) Modelling delay propagation trees for scheduled flights, ISDEFE & IFISC, ATM Seminar

  • Athenes S, Averty P, Puechmorel S, Delahaye D, Collet C (2002) ATC complexity and controller workload: trying to bridge the gap. In: Proceedings of the international conference on HCI in aeronautics, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp 56–60, 23–25 October 2002

  • Boag C, Neal A, Loft S, Halford GS (2006) An analysis of relational complexity in an air traffic control conflict detection task. Ergonomics 49(14):1508–1526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breiman L, Friedman JH, Olshen RA, Stone PJ (1984) Classification and regression trees. Wadsworth International Group, Belmont, CA

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) 2015/340 of 20 February 2015 laying down technical requirements and administrative procedures relating to air traffic controllers’ licences and certificates pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council, amending Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 923/2012 and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) No 805/2011

  • Cook A, Rivas D (eds) (2016) Complexity science in air traffic management. Ashgate Publishing Limited, England

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook AJ, Zanin M (2016) Complex network theory. In: Cook AJ, Rivas D (ed) Complexity science in air traffic management Abingdon and New York Routledge. pp 9–22

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cook AJ, Blom H, Lillo F, Mantegna R, Miccichè SS, Rivas D, Vázquez R, Zanin M, Mantegnad R (2015) Applying complexity science to air traffic management. J Air Transp Manag 42:149–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corver S, Grote G (2016) Uncertainty management in enroute air traffic control: a field study exploring controller strategies and requirements for automation. Cogn Technol Work 18(3):541–565

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Domingos P (2012) A few useful things to know about machine learning. Commun ACM 55(10):78–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EUROCONTROL (2008) Principles for the design of radar simulation. Luxembourg: The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)

  • EUROCONTROL (2018a) ATFCM Operations Manual: Network Manager. Edition Number: 22.0. Brussels: The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)

  • EUROCONTROL (2018b) NM ATFCM Monthly summary per airport: ATFM Delay Part—December 2017. Brussels: The European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL)

  • Geng L, Hamilton HJ (2006) Interestingness measures for data mining: a survey. ACM Comput Surv 38(3):9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granger G, Durand N (2003) A traffic complexity approach through cluster analysis. In 5th USA/Eur. Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar

  • Hansman RJ, Davison HJ (2000) The effect of shared information on pilot/controller and controller/controller interactions. In: Third USA/Europe Air Traffic Management R&D Seminar. Napoli, Italy

  • Hilburn B (2004) Cognitive complexity in air traffic control: a literature review. In: Eurocontrol, EEC note no. 04/04

  • ICAO (1986) Manual of Surface Movement guidance and control systems (SMGCS), document 9476, 1st edn. International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  • ICAO (2016) Air traffic management. Procedures for air navigation services, Document 4444, 16th edn. International Civil Aviation Organization, Montreal

    Google Scholar 

  • Kallus KW, Van Damme D, Dittman A (1999) Integrated job and task analysis of air traffic controllers: Phase 2. Task analysis of en-route controllers (European Air Traffic Management Programme Rep. No. HUM.ET1.ST01.1000-REP-04). EUROCONTROL, Brussels, Belgium

  • Kass GV (1980) An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. Appl Stat 29(2):119–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kontogiannis T, Malakis S (2017) Cognitive engineering and safety organization in air traffic management. Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kontogiannis T, Malakis S, McDonald N (2017) Integrating operational and risk information with system risk models in air traffic control. Cogn Technol Work 19(2–3):345–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kopardekar P, Schwartz A, Magyarits S, Rhodes J (2007) Airspace complexity measurement: an air traffic control simulation analysis. In: 7th USA/Europe air traffic management R/D seminar, Barcelona, Spain

  • Laudeman IV, Shelden SG, Branstrom R, Brasil CL (1998). Dynamic density: an air traffic management metric. No. NASATM- 1988-11226. Moffet Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center

  • Lee K, Feron E, Pritchett A (2009) Describing airspace complexity: airspace response to disturbances. J Guidance, Control, Dyn 32(1):210–222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu B, Hsu W, Mun L, Lee H (1999) Finding interesting patterns using user expectations. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 11(6):817–832

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loft S, Bolland S, Humphreys MS, Neal A (2009) A theory and model of conflict detection in air traffic control: incorporating environmental constraints. J Exp Psychol: Appl 15(2):106–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Loh WY, Shih X (1997) Split selection methods for classification trees. Statistica Sinica 7:815–840

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Malakis S, Kontogiannis T (2013) A Sensemaking perspective on framing the mental picture of air traffic controllers. Appl Ergonom 44(2):327–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malakis S, Kontogiannis T, Psaros P (2014) Monitoring and evaluating failure-sensitive strategies in air traffic control simulator training. In: 7th International conference on Pervasive technologies related to assistive environments (PETRA), 27–30 May 2014, Rhodes, Greece

  • Masalonis AJ, Callaham MB, Wanke CR (2003) Dynamic density and complexity metrics for real time traffic flow management. In: Proceedings of the 5th USA/Europe air traffic management R & D seminar, Budapest, Hungary

  • Mogford RH, Guttman JA, Morrow SL, Kopardekar P (1995) The complexity construct in air Traffic control: a review and synthesis of the literature. No. DOT/FAA/CT-TN95/22. Atlantic City, NJ: Federal Aviation Administration, William Hughes Technical Center

  • Monechi B, Ducci M, Cipolla M, Vitali S, Micciche S, Mantegna R, Gurtner G, Lillo F, Valori L, Pozzi S (2013) Exploratory analysis of safety data and their interrelation with flight trajectories and network metrics. In: Air transportation system conferences—interdisciplinary science for innovative air traffic management

  • Prandini M, Piroddi L, Puechmorel S, Brazdilova SL (2011) Toward air traffic complexity assessment in new generation air traffic management systems. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 12(3):809–818

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan JR (1986) Induction of decision trees. Mach Learn 1:81–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinlan JR (1993) C4.5: programs for machine learning. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington

    Google Scholar 

  • Rokach L, Maimon O (2015) Data mining with decision trees: theory and applications, 2nd edn. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Singapore

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Wang H, Xu X, Zhao Y (2016) Empirical analysis of aircraft clusters in air traffic situation networks. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part G: J Aerosp Eng 231(9):1718–1731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang J, Yang J, Wu C (2015) From trees to forest: relational complexity network and workload of air traffic controllers. Ergonomics. 58(8):1320–1336

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ATC Section, Hellenic Civil Aviation Authority, Rhodes/Diagoras International Airport, Rhodes, Greece

    Stathis Malakis & Panagiotis Psaros

  2. Department of Production Engineering and Management, Technical University of Crete, Chania, Greece

    Tom Kontogiannis

  3. Department of Business Administration, University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Christina Malaki

Authors
  1. Stathis Malakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Panagiotis Psaros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tom Kontogiannis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christina Malaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stathis Malakis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Malakis, S., Psaros, P., Kontogiannis, T. et al. Classification of air traffic control scenarios using decision trees: insights from a field study in terminal approach radar environment. Cogn Tech Work 22, 159–179 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00562-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-019-00562-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation