Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-lrblm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-15T22:02:24.174Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Exploring the MASS-DoA2 control-switching mechanism: Results from the autonomous ship guidelines review and expert survey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2025

Wenjun Zhang ,
Congrui Mu ,
Yu Wang ,
Xue Yang ,
Xiangyu Zhou Open the ORCID record for Xiangyu Zhou [Opens in a new window] ,
Xiangkun Meng  and
Lianbo Li
Wenjun Zhang*
Affiliation:
Navigation College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China Dalian Key Laboratory of Safety & Security Technology for Autonomous Shipping, Dalian, China
Congrui Mu
Affiliation:
Navigation College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China Dalian Key Laboratory of Safety & Security Technology for Autonomous Shipping, Dalian, China
Yu Wang
Affiliation:
Navigation College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China Dalian Key Laboratory of Safety & Security Technology for Autonomous Shipping, Dalian, China
Xue Yang
Affiliation:
Navigation College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China Dalian Key Laboratory of Safety & Security Technology for Autonomous Shipping, Dalian, China
Xiangyu Zhou
Affiliation:
Navigation College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China Dalian Key Laboratory of Safety & Security Technology for Autonomous Shipping, Dalian, China
Xiangkun Meng
Affiliation:
Navigation College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China Dalian Key Laboratory of Safety & Security Technology for Autonomous Shipping, Dalian, China
Lianbo Li
Affiliation:
Navigation College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian, China Dalian Key Laboratory of Safety & Security Technology for Autonomous Shipping, Dalian, China
*
*Corresponding author: Wenjun Zhang; Email: wenjunzhang@dlmu.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The development of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ship (MASS) is progressing rapidly within the maritime industry. Degree Two of MASS (MASS-DoA2), balancing human oversight and autonomous efficiency, will likely gain regulatory approval and industry acceptance. MASS-DoA2 possesses different control modes to adapt to various scenarios. However, the control-switching mechanisms among operators at shore control centres, autonomous navigation systems and number of seafarers onboard remain ambiguous, which poses a new risk that may significantly influence navigation safety. This study focuses on MASS-DoA2 and carries out a systematic review of autonomous ship guidelines. A questionnaire was designed based on the review findings, and a survey was carried out among captains and researchers in related fields. The review identified 11 control-switching scenarios with suggested takeover agents and the switching process and outlined the priority relationship between various takeover agents. Finally, a control-switching framework for MASS – DoA2 is proposed. It can serve as a theoretical framework for research on MASS's dynamic degree of autonomy and provide a reference for maritime regulatory authorities in establishing MASS – DoA2 control-switching mechanisms.

Keywords

maritime autonomous surface shipcontrol switchingautonomous ship guidelineexpert survey
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , First View , pp. 1 - 30
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Institute of Navigation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) (2022). Requirements for Autonomous and Remote Control Functions. TX: ABS.Google Scholar
Bačkalov, I. (2020). Safety of autonomous inland vessels: An analysis of regulatory barriers in the present technical standards in Europe. Safety Science, 128, 104763. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Botes, M., Bruce, J. and Cooke, R. (2023). Consensus-based recommendations for strengthening emergency care at primary health care level: A Delphi study. Global Health Action, 16(1), 2156114. doi:10.1080/16549716.2022.2156114CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bureau Veritas (BV) (2019). Guidelines for Autonomous Shipping. Paris: BV.Google Scholar
Burmeister, H.-C., Bruhn, W., Rødseth, Ø. J. and Porathe, T. (2014). Autonomous unmanned merchant vessel and its contribution towards the e-navigation implementation: The MUNIN perspective. International Journal of e-Navigation and Maritime Economy, 1, 1–13. doi:10.1016/j.enavi.2014.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Q., Lau, Y.-y., Zhang, P., Dulebenets, M. A., Wang, N. and Wang, T.-n. (2023). From concept to practicality: Unmanned vessel research in China. Heliyon, 9(4), e15182. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15182CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, T., Utne, I. B., Wu, B. and Wu, Q. (2023). A novel system-theoretic approach for human-system collaboration safety: Case studies on two degrees of autonomy for autonomous ships. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 237, 109388. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2023.109388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
China Classification Society (CCS) (2018). Guidelines for Autonomous Cargo Ships 2018. Beijing: CCS.Google Scholar
China Classification Society (CCS) (2023). Rules for Intelligent Ships 2023. Beijing: CCS.Google Scholar
ClassNK (2020). Guidelines for Concept Design of Automated Operation/Autonomous Operation of Ships. Tokyo: ClassNK.Google Scholar
Det Norske Veritas (DNV) (2021). Autonomous and Remotely Operated Ships. Oslo: DNV.Google Scholar
Det Norske Veritas (DNV) (2022a). Competence of Remote Control Centre Operators. Oslo: DNV.Google Scholar
Det Norske Veritas (DNV) (2022b). Certification Scheme for Remote Control Centre Operators. Oslo: DNV.Google Scholar
Det Norske Veritas (DNV) (2022c). Management Systems for Auto-Remote Operations. Oslo: DNV.Google Scholar
de Vos, J., Hekkenberg, R. G. and Koelman, H. J. (2020). Damage stability requirements for autonomous ships based on equivalent safety. Safety Science, 130, 104865. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104865CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Union (2020). EU Operational Guidelines for Safe, Secure and Sustainable Trials of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS). Bruxelles: European Union.Google Scholar
Fan, C., Montewka, J. and Zhang, D. (2022). A risk comparison framework for autonomous ships navigation. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 226, 108709. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2022.108709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felski, A. and Zwolak, K. (2020). The ocean-going autonomous ship – challenges and threats. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 8, 41. doi:10.3390/jmse8010041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Göb, R., McCollin, C. and Ramalhoto, M. F. (2007). Ordinal methodology in the analysis of Likert scales. Quality Quantity, 41, 601–626. doi:10.1007/s11135-007-9089-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goerlandt, F. (2020). Maritime autonomous surface ships from a risk governance perspective: Interpretation and implications. Safety Science, 128, 104758. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, C. and Utne, I. B. (2022). Development of risk indicators for losing navigational control of autonomous ships. Ocean Engineering, 266(5), 113204. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.113204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries (2023). Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries(HSHI) Building the World's First ‘AI Engineer’ Equipped ship. Available at https://www.hshi.co.kr/eng/bbs/news/view.do?n=142&pg=1 (accessed 7 October 2023).Google Scholar
IMO, (2018). Revised Guidelines for Formal Safety Assessment (FSA) for use in the IMO Rule-Making Process. London: International Maritime Organization.Google Scholar
Issa, M., Ilinca, A., Ibrahim, H. and Rizk, P. (2022). Maritime autonomous surface ships: Problems and challenges facing the regulatory process. Sustainability, 14, 15630. doi:10.3390/su142315630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Japan Radio Co. Ltd (2023). The Nippon Foundation MEGURI2040 Fully Autonomous Ship Project Demonstration Test of Autonomous Navigation System on Large RORO Cargo. Available at https://www.jrc.co.jp/en/news/2023/1128-1 (accessed 13 March 2024).Google Scholar
Kari, R. and Steinert, M. (2021). Human factor issues in remote ship operations: Lesson learned by studying different domains. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 9, 385. doi:10.3390/jmse9040385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
KONGSBERG (2023). KONGSBERG Successfully Demonstrates Autonomous Vessel Operations on Belgium's Inland Waterway Network. Available at https://www.kongsberg.com/maritime/about-us/news-and-media/news-archive/2023/trial-of-autonomous-shipping/ (accessed 13 March 2024).Google Scholar
Korean Register (KR) (2022). Guidance for Autonomous Ships. Busan: KR.Google Scholar
Lehtola, V., Montewka, J. and Salokannel, J. (2020). Sea captains’ views on automated ship route optimization in ice-covered waters. The Journal of Navigation, 73(2), 364–383. doi:10.1017/S0373463319000651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z. and Seta, M. (2022). The expanding role of classification societies in conserving the marine environment: The case of the 2004 BWM convention. Ocean Development & International Law, 53(4), 318–345. doi:10.1080/00908320.2022.2148793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, W., Chen, W., Hu, S., Xi, Y. and Guo, Y. (2023a). Risk evolution model of marine traffic via STPA method and MC simulation: A case of MASS along coastal setting. Ocean Engineering, 281, 114673. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2023.114673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, X., Oh, P., Zhou, Y. and Yuen, K. F. (2023b). Operational risk identification of maritime surface autonomous ship: A network analysis approach. Transport Policy, 130, 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.tranpol.2022.10.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Z., Zhang, D., Han, B. and Wan, C. (2023c). Risk and reliability analysis for maritime autonomous surface ship: A bibliometric review of literature from 2015 to 2022. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 187, 107090. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2023.107090CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, C., Chu, X., Wu, W., Li, S., He, Z., Zheng, M., Zhou, H. and Li, Z. (2022a). Human–machine cooperation research for navigation of maritime autonomous surface ships: A review and consideration. Ocean Engineering, 246, 110555. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.110555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, J., Aydin, M., Akyuz, E., Arslan, O., Uflaz, E., Kurt, R. and Turan, O. (2022b). Prediction of human–machine interface (HMI) operational errors for maritime autonomous surface ships (MASS). Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 27, 293–306. doi:10.1007/s00773-021-00834-wCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd's Register (LR) (2017a). Cyber-enabled Ships ShipRight Procedure Assignment for Cyber Descriptive Notes for Autonomous & Remote Access Ships. London: LR.Google Scholar
Lloyd's Register (LR) (2017b). LR Code for Unmanned Marine Systems. London: LR.Google Scholar
Ludvigsen, M. and Sørensen, A. J. (2016). Towards integrated autonomous underwater operations for ocean mapping and monitoring. Annual Reviews in Control, 42, 145–157. doi:10.1016/j.arcontrol.2016.09.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, J., Geng, X., Li, Y. and Yu, Q. (2022). Study on the risk model of the intelligent ship navigation. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2022, 3437255. doi:10.1155/2022/3437255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marine in Sight (2023). KONGSBERG Successfully Completes Autonomous Operation of Coastal Cargo Ship. Available at https://www.marineinsight.com/shipping-news/kongsberg-successfully-completes-autonomous-operation-of-coastal-cargo-ship/ (accessed 13 March 2024).Google Scholar
Marine in Sight (2024 ). South Korea Launches 1st Container Ship Built for Autonomous Operations Available at https://www.marineinsight.com/shipping-news/south-korea-launches-1st-container-ship-built-for-autonomous-operations/ (accessed 13 March 2024).Google Scholar
Maritime Safety Administration of the People's Republic of China (China MSA) (2023). Provisional Rules for the Trial Technology and Inspection of Autonomous Navigation of Ships. Beijing: China MSA.Google Scholar
Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) (2019). Interim Guidelines for MASS Trials. London: IMO.Google Scholar
Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) (2021). Outcome of the Regulatory Scoping Exercise for the use of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships(MASS). London: IMO.Google Scholar
Mitsui, O. S. K. (2022). Lines, MOL and Partners Set World Records for Time and Distance in Autonomous Navigation with Sea Trial Using Large Commercial Car Ferry. Available at https://www.mol.co.jp/en/pr/2022/22017.html (accessed 13 March 2024).Google Scholar
Mizuno, N. and Kuboshima, R. (2019). Implementation and evaluation of non-linear optimal feedback control for ship's automatic berthing by recurrent neural network. IFAC-PapersOnLine, 52(21), 91–96. doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2019.12.289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, V. S. (2019). Investigation on a novel support system for automatic ship berthing in marine practice. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 7, 114. doi:10.3390/jmse7040114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piao, Z., Guo, C. and Sun, S. (2019). Research into the automatic berthing of underactuated unmanned ships Under wind loads based on experiment and numerical analysis. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 7, 300. doi:10.3390/jmse7090300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramos, M. A., Utne, I. B. and Mosleh, A. (2019). Collision avoidance on maritime autonomous surface ships: Operators’ tasks and human failure events. Safety Science, 116, 33–44. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2019.02.038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramos, M. A., Thieme, C. A., Utne, I. B. and Mosleh, A. (2020a). Human-system concurrent task analysis for maritime autonomous surface ship operation and safety. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 195, 106697. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2019.106697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramos, M. A., Thieme, C. A., Utne, I. B. and Mosleh, A. (2020b). A generic approach to analysing failures in human – system interaction in autonomy. Safety Science, 129, 104808. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rindermann, H., Becker, D. and Coyle, T. R. (2016). Survey of expert opinion on intelligence: Causes of international differences in cognitive ability tests. Frontiers in Psychology, 399(7), 1–9.Google Scholar
Rindermann, H., Becker, D. and Coyle, T. R. (2017). Survey of expert opinion on intelligence: The FLynn effect and the future of intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 242–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rindermann, H., Becker, D. and Coyle, T. R. (2020). Survey of expert opinion on intelligence: Intelligence research, experts’ background, controversial issues, and the media. Intelligence, 78, 101406. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2019.101406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rødseth, Ø.J. and Nordahl, H. (2017). Definitions for Autonomous Merchant Ships. Trondheim: Norwegian Forum for Autonomous Ships.Google Scholar
Russian Maritime Register of Shipping (RS) (2020). Regulations for Classification of Maritime Autonomous and Remotely Controlled Surface Ships. St. Petersburg: RS.Google Scholar
SAE International (2014). Surface Vehicle Information Report: Taxonomy and Definitions for Terms Related to on-Road Motor Vehicle Automated Driving Systems. New York: SAE International.Google Scholar
Schrum, M. L., Johnson, M., Ghuy, M. and Gombolay, M. C. (2020). Four Years in Review: Statistical Practices of Likert Scales in Human-Robot Interaction Studies. In Companion of the 2020 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ‘20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, pp. 43–52. doi:10.1145/3371382.3380739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shang, Z. (2023). Use of delphi in health sciences research: A narrative review. Medicine, 102, pe32829. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032829CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sheridan, T. B. (2011). Adaptive automation, level of automation, allocation authority, supervisory control, and adaptive control: Distinctions and modes of adaptation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 41, 662–667. doi: 10.1109/TSMCA.2010.2093888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tran, V. L. and Im, N.-K. (2012). A study on ship automatic berthing with assistance of auxiliary devices. International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, 4(3), 199–210. doi:10.3744/jnaoe.2012.4.3.199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trevelyan, E. G. and Robinson, P. N. (2015). Delphi methodology in health research: How to do it? European Journal of Integrative Medicine, 7, 423–428. doi:10.1016/j.eujim.2015.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Veitch, E. and Alsos, O. A. (2022). A systematic review of human-AI interaction in autonomous ship systems. Safety Science, 152, 105778. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Chen, P., Wu, B., Wan, C. and Yang, Z. (2022). A trustable architecture over blockchain to facilitate maritime administration for MASS systems. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 219, 108246. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2021.108246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wróbel, K., Gil, M., Huang, Y. and Wawruch, R. (2022). The vagueness of COLREG versus collision avoidance techniques—a discussion on the current state and future challenges concerning the operation of autonomous ships. Sustainability, 14, 16516. doi:10.3390/su142416516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, B., Yip, T. L., Yan, X. and Guedes Soares, C. (2022). Review of techniques and challenges of human and organizational factors analysis in maritime transportation. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 219, 108249. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2021.108249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xing, W. and Zhu, L. (2023). Exploring legal gaps and barriers to the use of unmanned merchant ships in China. Marine Policy, 153, 105662. doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, X., Utne, I. B., Sandøy, S. S., Ramos, M. A. and Rokseth, B. (2020). A systems-theoretic approach to hazard identification of marine systems with dynamic autonomy. Ocean Engineering, 217, 107930. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107930CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, X., Zhang, W. J., Lyu, H. G., Zhou, X. Y., Wang, Q. W. and Ramezani, R. (2023). Hybrid early-warning framework for unsafe crew acts detection and prediction. Ocean & Coastal Management, 231, 106383. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, X., Zhou, T., Zhou, X. Y., Zhang, W. J., Mu, C. R. and Xu, S. (2024). A framework to identify failure scenarios in the control mode transition process for autonomous ships with dynamic autonomy. Ocean & Coastal Management, 249, 107003. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.107003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yara International (2021). Yara to Start Operating the World's First Fully Emission-Free Container Ship. Available at https://www.yara.com/corporate-releases/yara-to-start-operating-the-worlds-first-fully-emission-free-container-ship (accessed 3 September 2023).Google Scholar
Zeng, G. (1996). Modern Epidemiology: Methods and Applications. Peking: Peking University Medical Press & Peking Union Medical College Press.Google Scholar
Zhang, M., Zhang, D., Yao, H. and Zhang, K. (2020). A probabilistic model of human error assessment for autonomous cargo ships focusing on human–autonomy collaboration. Safety Science, 130, 104838. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, D., Han, Z., Zhang, K., Zhang, J., Zhang, M. and Zhang, F. (2022a). Use of hybrid causal logic method for preliminary hazard analysis of maritime autonomous surface ships. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, 10, 725. doi:10.3390/jmse10060725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhang, W., Meng, X., Yang, X., Lyu, H., Zhou, X.-Y. and Wang, Q. (2022b). A practical risk-based model for early warning of seafarer errors using integrated Bayesian network and SPAR-H. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 10271. doi:10.3390/ijerph191610271CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhou, X.-Y., Liu, Z.-J., Wang, F.-W., Wu, Z.-L. and Cui, R.-D. (2020a). Towards applicability evaluation of hazard analysis methods for autonomous ships. Ocean Engineering, 214, 107773. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2020.107773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, X., Huang, J., Wang, F., Wu, Z. and Liu, Z. (2020b). A study of the application barriers to the use of autonomous ships posed by the good seamanship requirement of COLREGs. The Journal of Navigation, 73(3), 710–725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, X.-Y., Liu, Z.-J., Wang, F.-W. and Wu, Z.-L. (2021). A system-theoretic approach to safety and security co-analysis of autonomous ships. Ocean Engineering, 222, 108569. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.108569CrossRefGoogle Scholar