MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971153730 · doi:10.1177/154193120104500407

Mental Models and the Abstraction Hierarchy: Assessing Ecological Compatibility

2001· article· en· W1971153730 on OpenAlexaff
Olivier St-Cyr, Catherine M. Burns

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompatibility (geochemistry)Computer scienceMental modelHierarchyAbstractionEcologyRisk analysis (engineering)PsychologyCognitive scienceEngineeringEpistemologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new approach to understanding mental models for complex industrial systems. Using the Abstraction Hierarchy (AH) framework as a way to describe mental models, we propose an approach to assess ecological compatibility between an operator's internal mental model and a model of the environment. In order to do so, we have combined and built upon the previous work of Rasmussen (1979) and Moray (1996). We believe that this new approach can assess ecological compatibility and ultimately provide the operator with a more accurate and complete internal mental model that reflects the reality of the environment. We argue that Ecological Interface Design (EID) is a way to link mental models and the environment. Future work will be needed in order to assess ecological compatibility. This includes capturing and examining operators' internal mental models, and comparing them with models of the environment.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.764

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207