MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W113945247

People, Places and Things: Leveraging Insights from Distributed Cognition Theory to Enhance the User-Centered Design of Meteorological Information Systems

2005· article· en· W113945247 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueUTAS Research Repository · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Science and Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetisSituatedComputer scienceCognitionEmbodied cognitionProcess (computing)Work (physics)Information systemData scienceSituated cognitionHuman–computer interactionKnowledge managementWorld Wide WebEngineeringArtificial intelligencePsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many challenges in developing information systems to support information intensive collaborative work such as weather forecasting. The Australian Bureau of Meteorology has instituted the forecast streamlining and enhancement project (FSEP) for its next generation of meteorological information systems (MetIS) and significantly, has recognized the critical importance of grounding new MetIS in a thorough understanding of the weather forecasting process. This poses a major challenge for researchers due to the forecasters' very busy 24/7 deadline-driven working environment and from the fact that critical information requirements arise from the situated, embodied and distributed nature of cognitive interactions between forecasters. 
\nThis paper explores the utility of distributed cognition (Dcog) theory as one approach to overcome these research challenges and generate insights for the design of the Bureau's next generation of MetIS. At the theoretical level, Dcog theory allows for the capture and validation of design insights through observing cognitive behavior viewed as a system of individuals interacting within their material environment. At the methodological level, the data collection techniques deployed captures the complex socio-technical nature of forecasters' information sharing without interrupting their work. This paper highlights the utility of Dcog theory in sensitizing designers to the cognitive implications of changes to information systems and/or work processes and how the use of Dcog can empower user centered design methodologies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.716
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it