Study on dynamic information presentation methods for manned/unmanned aerial vehicle cooperative command and control interfaces

doi:10.23919/JSEE.2026.000173

Abstract

Abstract:

To address the problem of inefficient visual information processing and high cognitive load in manned/unmanned aerial vehicle (M/UAV) cooperative command and control (C2) interfaces under complex battlefield environments, this paper proposes a phased dynamic information presentation strategy tailored to different mission phases. Based on visual attentional capture theory and stimulus characteristics, we designed four dynamic presentation methods—blinking, flowing border, masking, and size scaling—and evaluated them across four typical mission phases: early warning detection, target identification, interception strike, and damage assessment. We conduct a mixed-design experiment with 4 mission phases × 5 presentation methods (including a static baseline) and collected data through eye-tracking, behavioral metrics, and subjective evaluations. Results show that dynamic presentation methods significantly outperform static ones in terms of task completion time, time to first fixation, total fixation duration, and subjective ratings. The optimal dynamic method for each phase is identified as blinking for early warning detection, masking for target identification, size scaling for interception strike, and flowing border for damage assessment. The findings demonstrate that phase-adapted dynamic presentation strategies can effectively enhance visual search efficiency and reduce cognitive load in M/UAV cooperative C2 interfaces, providing practical guidance for human-computer interaction design in high-pressure operational scenarios.

Key words: manned/unmanned aerial vehicle (M/UAV) cooperative, dynamic information presentation, command and control (C2) interface, visual attentional capture

Yilin Ou, Xiaoli Wu, Biao Yan, Yuhan Wu, Xinyue Zhang, Hao Qu, Chuanyu Wu. Study on dynamic information presentation methods for manned/unmanned aerial vehicle cooperative command and control interfaces[J]. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2026, 37(5): 1624-1641.

Figures/Tables 20

Table 1

Fig 1

Fig 2

Fig 3

Table 2

Fig 4

Table 3

Fig 5

Table 4

Table 5

Fig 6

Fig 8

Fig 7

Fig 9

Fig 10

Table 6

Fig 11

Fig 12

Fig 13

Fig 14

References 38

1	Wang W, Zhu Y S, Wang Q L, et al Research on information fusion method for human computer interaction interface of command and control system in MR environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2024, 41 (4): 2052.
2	Zhuang T, Liu X, Geng Z Research on optimization problem of surface-to-air missile weapon system against cruise missile deployment based on complex battlefield environment. Military Operations Research and Evaluation, 2024, 39 (1): 75.
3	Jiao Z Q, Yao P Y, Zhang J Y, et al MAV/UAV task coalition phased-formation method. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 2019, 2 (30): 402. doi: 10.21629/jsee.2019.02.18
4	Chen D, Wang J Intuitionistic fuzzy set-based threat assessment for air defense combat targets. Journal of Detection and Control, 2019, 41 (4): 46.
5	Guo F. Human factors engineering [M]. Xi’an: Northeastern University Press, 2001. (in Chinese)
6	Cowan N George Miller’s magical number of immediate memory in retrospect: observations on the faltering progression of science. Psychological Review, 2015, 122 (3): 536.
7	Hou Y T, Xia J J Research on icon design of interactive interface based on cognitive load theory. Industrial Design, 2023, (6): 27.
8	Cui Y. Advertising icon design and communication conception under the condition of EEG and eye movement experiments-taking the Lingmei Omnimedia e-commerce platform mobile app as an example [C]//International Conference on Cyber Security Intelligence and Analytics. Cham: Springer, 2020: 1348.
9	Tang J, Tian C Z, Song M Research on optimization human-computer interaction design in the AWACS control system. Air & Space Defense, 2024, 7 (5): 90.
10	Niu X Research on the performance evaluation of display and interaction for multi-station task collaborative UAVs. Fire Control & Command Control, 2023, 48 (4): 72.
11	Al-Samarraie H, Sarsam S M, Umar I N Visual perception of multi-column-layout text: insight from repeated and non-repeated reading. Behaviour & Information Technology, 2016, 36 (1): 1. doi: 10.1080/0144929x.2016.1196502
12	Wu X L, Chen Y Correlation between error factors, visual perception, and interface layout-taking digital instrument control equipment of nuclear power safety injection system as an optimization example. International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence, 2020, 34 (5): 2055012.
13	Fan X L, Zhou Q X, Liu Z Q Principle of plane display interface design based on visual search. Journal of Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2015, 41 (2): 216.
14	Liu T Design of navigation display interface for agricultural machinery based on visual attention mechanism. Journal of Agricultural Mechanization Research, 2024, 46 (11): 110.
15	Lu M, Fish N, Wang S Q, et al Enhancing static charts with data-driven animations. IEEE Trans. on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 2022, 28 (7): 2628.
16	Yoo S, Jeong S, Kim S, et al Saliency-based gaze visualization for eye movement analysis. Sensors, 2021, 21 (15): 5178.
17	Xue C Q. Design methods and applications for digital interfaces in human-computer interaction of complex information systems [M]. Nanjing, China: Southeast University Press, 2015.
18	Theeuwes J Top-down and bottom-up control of visual selection. Acta Psychological, 2010, 135 (2): 77.
19	Folk C L, Remington R W Selectivity in distraction by irrelevant featural singletons: evidence for two forms of attentional capture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 1998, 24 (3): 847.
20	Wang H Y The phenomenon of involuntary attentional shift: stimulus-driven attentional capture. Journal of Changchun Normal University, 2020, 39 (5): 29.
21	Roque N A, Wright T J. Boot W R. Do different attention capture paradigms measure different types of capture? [J]. Atten Percept Psychophys, 2016, 78: 2014.
22	Nikolic M I, Orr J, Sarter N B. The effects of display context on the effectiveness of visual onsets for attention capture [C]// 20th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 2001.
23	Imbert J P, Hodgetts H M, Parise R, et al Attentional costs and failures in air traffic control notifications. Ergonomics, 2014, 57 (12): 1817.
24	Li J, Yu S L, Wu X L Effects of shape character encodings in the human-computer interface on visual cognitive performance. Journal of Computer-Aided Design & Computer Graphics, 2018, 30 (1): 163.
25	Lu Y K. Research on visualization of complex information system based on visual attention capture [D]. Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2020. (in Chinese)
26	Wu X L. Study on error-cognition mechanism of task interface in complex information system [D]. Southeast University, 2015. (in Chinese)
27	Kaeppler K Crossmodal associations between olfaction and vision: color and shape visualizations of odors. Chemosensory Perception, 2018, 11 (2): 95.
28	Szafir D A Modeling color difference for visualization design. IEEE Trans. on Visualization & Computer Graphics, 2017, 24 (1): 392.
29	Zhang G Y, Sun J, Gong J H, et al Exploration of visual variable guidance in outdoor augmented reality geovisualization. International Journal of Digital Earth, 2023, 16 (2): 4095.
30	Jiang Z Y, Xin H W, Bi H K, et al Research on design of radar man-machine interaction software based on task role. Journal of Air Force Early Warning Academy, 2018, 32 (1): 66.
31	Bennett B K, Flach M J Visual momentum redux. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 2012, 70 (6): 399.
32	Liu H L, Liu Y L Design on UAV interactive interface. Computer & Network, 2019, 45 (9): 66.
33	Mullet E, Chasseigne G Assessing information integration processes: a comparison of findings obtained with between-subjects designs versus within subjects designs. Quality & Quantity, 2018, 52 (4): 1977.
34	Feng Z L, Yang Z Visual coding design of augmented reality head-up display pedestrian warning system. Packaging Engineering, 2023, 44 (12): 126.
35	Chen C M, Tsao H W An instant perspective comparison system to facilitate learners’ discussion effectiveness in an online discussion process. Computers & Education, 2021, 164, 104037.
36	Jia H, Kim B K, Ge L Speed up, size down: how animated movement speed in product videos influences size assessment and product evaluation. Journal of Marketing, 2020, 84 (5): 100.
37	Ruthruff E, Faulks M, Maxwell J W, et al Attentional dwelling and capture by color singletons. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 2020, 82 (6): 3048.
38	Stolte M, Ansorge U Automatic capture of attention by flicker. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 2021, 83 (4): 1407.

Static feature	Illustration	Dynamic variable	Illustration
Orientation		Duration
Size		Rate of change
Color		Magnitude of change
Shape		Temporal logic

Mission phase	Interactive task	Static	Dynamic
Mission phase	Interactive task	Static	Blinking	Flowing border	Masking	Size Scaling
Early warning detection	Receive warning information; Confirm alert details
Target identification	Identify ballistic missile with highest threat level
Interception strike	Locate attack aircraft-09 on situational map; review attack aircraft-09 details
Damage assessment	Assess interception status of attack aircraft-09 & ground air defense system; decide mission termination/return

Number	Question
1	Under this presentation method, were you able to quickly discover key information?
2	Did the visual elements (e.g., dynamic effects, color) of this method cause you interference?
3	Was this method convenient for you to make decisions or operations quickly?
4	Did this method effectively guide your attention to critical information nodes?
5	Would you prefer to use this presentation method for such tasks?

Comparison group	Rank	N	Mean rank	Sum of ranks	Z	Asymptotic significance (2-tailed)
Early warning phase dynamic mean time-early warning phase static time	Negative ranks	19^a	10.00	190.00	−3.823^b	< 0.001
	Positive ranks	0^b	0.00	0.00
	Ties	0^c
Target identification phase dynamic mean time-target identification phase static time	Negative ranks	19^a	10.00	190.00	−3.823^b	< 0.001
	Positive ranks	0^b	0.00	0.00
	Ties	0^c
Interception strike phase dynamic mean time-interception strike phase static time	Negative ranks	19^a	10.00	190.00	−3.823^b	< 0.001
	Positive ranks	0^b	0.00	0.00
	Ties	0^c
Damage assessment phase dynamic mean time-damage assessment phase static time	Negative ranks	19^a	10.00	190.00	−3.823^b	< 0.001
	Positive ranks	0^b	0.00	0.00
	Ties	0^c

Mission phase	Flowing border- blinking	Masking- blinking	Size scaling- blinking	Masking- flowing border	Size scaling- flowing border	Size scaling- masking
Early warning detection	<0.001	0.004	<0.001	0.365	0.601	0.872
Target identification	0.587	<0.001	0.809	<0.001	0.904	<0.001
Interception strike	0.355	0.872	<0.001	0.573	<0.001	<0.001
Damage assessment	<0.001	0.147	0.102	<0.001	<0.001	0.936