MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1878151390 · doi:10.1108/jqme-05-2013-0030

Human factors engineering in aircraft maintenance: a review

2015· review· en· W1878151390 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsInternational Civil Aviation Organization
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAviationAircraft maintenanceEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Systems engineeringAviation accidentConstruction engineeringTransport engineeringEngineering managementAeronauticsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present a literature review on human factors in aircraft maintenance and to analyze and synthesize the findings in the literature on human factors engineering in aircraft maintenance. Design/methodology/approach – The review adopts a threefold approach: searching and collecting the scientific literature; sorting them on the basis of relevance and applications; and review of the scientific evidences. Broad areas of aircraft maintenance regulations are identified and each area was explored to study the level of scientific growth and publications. Notable theories, models and concepts are being summarized. Findings – Application of human factor principles in aviation spread beyond the technical arena of man-machine interface. The discipline has created a great impact on aircraft design, operations and maintenance. Its applications have percolated into design of aircraft maintenance facilities, task cards and equipment. Human factor concepts are being used for maintenance resource management. The principles are applied to shape the safety behavior and culture in aviation maintenance workplace. Nevertheless, the review unfolds immense potential for future research. Research limitations/implications – Research outcomes of non-aviation studies are also reviewed and consolidated to extend the applications to the aviation industry. Practical implications – This review would be a consolidated source of information confining to the physical aspect of human factors engineering in aircraft maintenance. It is intended to serve as a quick reference guide to the researchers and maintenance practitioners. Social implications – It brought out the benefits of adopting the principles of human factor engineering in aircraft maintenance. Application of human factor philosophy ensures enhanced safety in air transport, personal safety and well-being of maintenance personnel. Originality/value – This is a unique review based on aircraft maintenance regulations that are baseline performance standards made mandatory by regulatory authorities. Therefore, the review has been considered to be made on aircraft maintenance regulatory requirements that surpass corporate or competitive strategies in aviation maintenance organization.

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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.006
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 head0.234
GPT teacher head0.541
Teacher spread0.307 · 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