MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137791117 · doi:10.1177/154193120404800142

Identifying the Factors that Contributed to the Ueberlingen Midair Collision

2004· article· en· W2137791117 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ashley Nunes, Tom Laursen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicRisk and Safety Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDescent (aeronautics)AeronauticsCollisionEvent (particle physics)DutyComputer securityComputer scienceSimulationPsychologyEngineeringMeteorologyGeographyPolitical scienceLawPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the night of July 1, 2002, a Boeing 757 collided with a Tupolev-154 at 35,000 feet, resulting in 71 fatalities. Initially, this accident was immediately blamed on two individuals. First, the pilot of the Tupolev aircraft whose command of the English language was questioned when repeated descent instructions from ATC were not immediately responded to. The second individual was the controller on duty, who was accused of not exercising the abilities needed in order to detect the presence of a conflict between aircraft and resolve them. In this paper, we provide an analysis of the event, highlighting fundamental human and system errors that occurred that night: errors that contributed to the worst midair collision in recent history.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.250 · 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.

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

Citations24
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicRisk and Safety AnalysisFrench-language works237,207