MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2224343096 · doi:10.1080/00140139.2015.1100329

Situation awareness acquired from monitoring process plants – the Process Overview concept and measure

2015· article· en· W2224343096 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan Lau, Greg A. Jamieson, Gyrd Skraaning

Bibliographic record

VenueErgonomics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Measure (data warehouse)Computer scienceWork in processReliability (semiconductor)Process controlEmpirical measureData miningEngineeringMathematicsOperations managementStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce Process Overview, a situation awareness characterisation of the knowledge derived from monitoring process plants. Process Overview is based on observational studies of process control work in the literature. The characterisation is applied to develop a query-based measure called the Process Overview Measure. The goal of the measure is to improve coupling between situation and awareness according to process plant properties and operator cognitive work. A companion article presents the empirical evaluation of the Process Overview Measure in a realistic process control setting. The Process Overview Measure demonstrated sensitivity and validity by revealing significant effects of experimental manipulations that corroborated with other empirical results. The measure also demonstrated adequate inter-rater reliability and practicality for measuring SA based on data collected by process experts. Practitioner Summary: The Process Overview Measure is a query-based measure for assessing operator situation awareness from monitoring process plants in representative settings.

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)0.000
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 score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErgonomicsSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207