MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051582747 · doi:10.1177/154193120404800360

Time in the Control of a Dynamic Environment

2004· article· en· W2051582747 on OpenAlexaff
Marie-Eve Jobidon, Robert Rousseau, Richard Breton

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicComplex Systems and Decision Making
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl (management)Dimension (graph theory)OffensiveTask (project management)EstimationComputer scienceSequential gameMode (computer interface)CognitionControl theory (sociology)PsychologyArtificial intelligenceEngineeringHuman–computer interactionGame theoryOperations researchMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because of their intrinsic nature, it is fundamental to consider the temporal dimension when studying control in dynamic situations. However, the temporal aspect is often taken for granted and not accounted for in cognitive or control models. The present study aims to understand the role of temporal estimation in the control of a dynamic task, within the Contextual Control Model (COCOM). Particularly, the main objective is to evaluate how time pressure influences the estimation of available and required time. A dynamic situation, which includes two sub-tasks, the pursuit of a target and the avoidance of hostile contacts, is used. Results show that both available and required estimated times, as well as performance, decrease with increased time pressure. These findings suggest that when faced with a high level of time pressure, people adapt their strategies by giving up an offensive mode of control, in favor of a more defensive one, earlier in the game.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.315

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicComplex Systems and Decision MakingFrench-language works237,207