MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038007975 · doi:10.1177/154193120204600114

The Effect of Predictive Aid Usage on Controller Strategies & Mental Demand under Direct Routing

2002· article· en· W2038007975 on OpenAlexaff
Ashley Nunes, Michael L. Matthews

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignEmbry-Riddle Aeronautical University
KeywordsWorkloadController (irrigation)Routing (electronic design automation)Variety (cybernetics)Air traffic controllerComputer sciencePrincipal (computer security)Air traffic controlPredictabilityOperations researchEngineeringComputer networkComputer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The implementation of Free Flight, a strategic goal for improving air traffic capacity in the National Airspace System, has raised many concerns amongst controllers regarding safety. A principal concern is the inability of the controller to project future aircraft states due to increased levels of mental workload and breakdowns in situation awareness. This paper looks at a by-product of the Free Flight concept, namely Direct Routing. It proposes a modified interface, which is representative of a combined data-link and conflict detection aid that would help in giving predictability back to the controller. Results showed that the aid served to ameliorate the effects of high airspace load on mental demand under an analogue of Direct Routing conditions. The results also highlight how controller strategies can vary when dealing with a variety of requests for routing changes. The implications of these results are discussed.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207