Ecological Interface Design: Progress and Challenges
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Not applicableConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: ReviewConsensus signal: Review
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.786
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 1.000
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.184 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Ecological interface design (EID) is a theoretical framework for designing human-computer interfaces for complex sociotechnical systems. Its primary aim is to support knowledge workers in adapting to change and novelty. This literature review shows that in situations requiring problem solving, EID improves performance when compared with current design approaches in industry. EID has been applied to industry-scale problems in a broad variety of application domains (e.g., process control, aviation, computer network management, software engineering, medicine, command and control, and information retrieval) and has consistently led to the identification of new information requirements. An experimental evaluation of EID using a full-fidelity simulator with professional workers has yet to be conducted, although some are planned. Several significant challenges remain as obstacles to the confident use of EID in industry. Promising paths for addressing these outstanding issues are identified. Actual or potential applications of this research include improving the safety and productivity of complex sociotechnical systems.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Topic
- Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Field
- Psychology
- Canadian institutions
- University of Toronto
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Sociotechnical systemVariety (cybernetics)Interface (matter)Computer scienceNoveltyFidelityProcess (computing)Control (management)Systems engineeringInformation systemRisk analysis (engineering)Knowledge managementEngineering managementEngineeringArtificial intelligence
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes